Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

17 Ala. App. 499

85 So 867

Deemer v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided June 15, 1920

Alabama Court of Appeals · decided 1920-06-15

<p>Witnesses <&wkey;350 — Objection to Cross-Examination as to- Conviction of Crime Properly Sustained.</p> <p>In assault case, the court properly sustained objection to question asked by defendant’s counsel of the party assaulted on the latter’s cross-examination: “How many times have you been convicted of crime?”</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently April 1986

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1920-06-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

MERRITT, J.

¶1 The defendants were tried and convicted under an indictment charging them with an assault with intent to rob, and were sentenced to the penitentiary for a term of not less than two years and not more than three years each.

¶2 During the cross-examination of the party assaulted, he was asked by defendant’s counsel: “How many times have you been convicted of crime?” The objection of the solicitor to the question was sustained by the court, and in so ruling the court did not commit error. Abrams v. State, ante, p. 379, 84 South. 862.

¶3 This appears to be the only exception reserved during the trial, and, there being no error in the record, the judgment of conviction is ajfirmed.

¶4 Affirmed.

/17/alaapp/499 · .json · Public domain