People v. Williams

The defendants were convicted of the crime of forgery. They appeal from the judgment.

One of the points made by appellants is that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict, but an examination of their brief shows that nothing more can be asserted than that there was a conflict in the evidence. Indeed, the argument proceeds principally upon the theory that the jury should have believed the witnesses for the defense and not those of the prosecution. With such a consideration, of course, courts of appeal have nothing to do. The evidence was sufficient.

Appellants assign as error certain rulings of the trial judge in sustaining objections to questions put to a handwriting expert on cross-examination. These questions were: “Do you not know that in Elmer Williams’ writing, in these examplars furnished you, there is a versatile mental agility and a humorous blending of understanding, personality and imagination not indicated in the written check upon which this action is based? ... Is it not a fact that the examples which the defendants, the Williams brothers, have given you, show in their writing frankness and candor, the opposite to concealment, dissimulation, falsehood,…