State v. Bookter
State v. Bookter
Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Defendant appeals from sentence upon conviction of obstructing a neighborhood road. The testimony was conflicting as to whether the use of the road by the public was adverse or permissive.
Appellant contends that this instruction excluded from the consideration of the jury the effect that evidence of per *99 missive use after the lapse of twenty years might have had on them in deciding whether the use previous thereto was adverse or permissive.
Considering the instruction in the immediate connection in which it was given, and in connection with the whole charge, we are satisfied it was not misleading, and that the jury understood the Court to mean only that, if the public had acquired a prescriptive right to use the road, the right so acquired could not be affected b}' some members of the public thereafter getting permission to use it, and that was clearly correct.
Affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- State v. Bookter.
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- 1. Evidence. — Where incompetent testimony is admitted without objection, other testimony of like character from the same or another witness, though admitted against timely objection, cannot avail as a ground of reversible error. 2. Highways — Roads.—The portion of the charge here complained of, when construed in its immediate connections, held not to be misleading, and the jury understood the Court to mean that if the public had acquired a prescriptive right to use the road, this right could not be affected by some member of the public thereafter getting permission to use it, which is correct.