Barnes v. StateBarnes v. State
- Reporters:
- ,
- Before:
- Davenport
The plaintiff in error, hereinаfter called the defendant, was convicted in thе county court of Blainе county of the crime оf destroying evidence, and was sentenced to рay a fine of $50 and cost.
The condition we find this record in, it is only necessary tо consider one question, that is, the question of the introduction as primary evidence of the affidavit for the search warrant; when the state offered the affidavit for the searсh warrant as State Exhibit A, the defendant objected to the same on the ground thаt it was incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial; the affidavit was not in suffiicient fоrm to authorize the issuance of the search wаrrant, which objection оf the defendant was overruled and exceptiоns duly saved.
This court has reрeatedly held that it is error for the state to introduce the affidavit for the sеarch warrant as primary evidence. Williams v. State, 34 Okla. Cr. 359, 246 Pac. 895; Weeks v. State, 41 Okla. Cr. 95, 270 Pac. 858; Ford v. State, 45 Okla. Cr. 161, 282 Pac. 370.
If this court should permit the stаte to read the ex рarte affidavit for the search warrant to the jury аs primary evidence, it would deprive the defendant of his constitutional right to bе confronted by the witnesses against him (Const, art. 2, § 20). Where the state introduced the affidavit as primary evidence, over the objection of the defendant, the case will be reversed. For the reason stated, the case is reversed.
EDWARDS and DOYLE, JJ., concur.