rehearing">

On Motion for Rehearing.

LATTIMORE, J.

Upon practically an identical record in a companion case' of Fields v. State (No. 6751) 252 S. W. 759, the majority of the court have concluded that no error was committed in the admission of evidence of what is claimed to be other offenses, nor in the charge of the learned trial court in reference thereto. For our views in greater detail upon these questions, an expression of which here would be but a reiteration, see the opinion of the majority upon the original consideration and upon motion for rehearing in the case of Fields v. State (No. 6751) 252 S. W. 759, opinion this day handed down.

The motion for rehearing will be overruled.

MORROW, P. J.

(dissenting). In the judgment of the writer, the learned trial judge committed error prejudicial to the appellant in failing to limit to its proper scope the evidence of a collateral crime.

Upon a practically identical record, the views of the writer have been expressed in somewhat more detail in the companion case of Fields v. State (No. 6751) 252 S. W. 759. *759A reiteration is unnecessary. Suffice it to say that, in the opinion of the writer, thte motion for rehearing should he granted. This is said with great deference to my brethren on the bench. The views expressed by them are well considered and may be sound. I am not, however, able to bring myself into accord with them.

Citation profile

Relationships

How this case has been treated — in progress