Mathews v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided November 17, 1925

Alabama Court of Appeals · decided 1925-11-17

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“He would plead guilty if they wouldn't put no sentence on him.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 32 Ala. App. 545 - Lindsey v. State

Relies on 18 Ala. App. 62 - Lyles v. State · 20 Ala. App. 539 - Bertalsen v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1925-11-17

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently September 1992

9 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

SAMFORD, J.

¶1 The judgment in this case must be reversed for two reasons:

¶2 (1) The state was permitted over the objection of defendant to introduce the record of a prior conviction of defendant for a similar offense. This under numerous decisions constitutes reversible error. Lyles v. State, 18 Ala. App. 62, 88 So. 375; Bertalsen v. State, 20 Ala. App. 539, 103 So. 480.

¶3 (2) The state was permitted, over the objection and exception of defendant, to prove that defendant said, in the presence of Beck and another officer, after the arrest had been made, and while defendant was in custody: “He would plead guilty if they wouldn’t put no sentence on him.” This was not an admission of guilt, or a confession, and should not have been admitted.

¶4 For the errors pointed out, the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded.

¶5 Reversed and remanded.