Walker v. State

Decided February 5, 1914

Alabama Court of Appeals · decided 1914-02-05

Heard before Hon. H. A. Pearce. J. T. Walker was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and he appeals. Counsel discuss the matters assigned as error, but without citation of authority. A predicate must be laid to show contradictory statements of witness. — McDaniel v. State, 166 Ala. 7. No abuse of discretion is shoivn in the cross-examination of the witness Watts. — Thompson v. State, 100 Alá. 70; Amos v. State, 96 Ala. 120.

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently January 1954

3 state decisions

Relies on Thompson v. State · Amos v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1914-02-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PELHAM, J.

¶1There was no abuse of the court’s discretion in permitting the state’s counsel, on cross-examination of the defendant’s witness Watts, to ask him if he was not a detective, or in refusing to exclude his answer, “I have been.” This was a matter largely in the. discretion of the trial court, in which latitude may be allowed, even to the extent of sometimes permitting irrelevant questions to test the accuracy, veracity, or character for credibility of the witness. — Thompson v. State, 100 Ala. 70, 14 South. 878; Amos v. State, 96 Ala. 120, 11 South. 424.

¶2The evidence was in conflict, and the court properly submitted the question of defendant’s guilt of the crime charged to the jury, and refused the general charge requested in writing by the defendant.

¶3Other matters presented are not insisted upon by counsel for defendant in brief, and are not of suflfticient merit to justify discussion.

¶4Affirmed.