Caviston v. State

Summary

The court affirmed the convictions for malice murder and first-degree arson. It held that the successor judge did not err in denying the motion for a new trial on the general grounds because the record did not show that the judge failed to exercise the required discretion. Assuming without deciding that admitting evidence about Caviston’s novel was an abuse of discretion, the court held the error harmless because the questioning was brief and the properly admitted evidence of guilt was overwhelming.