67 So. 583 | Ala. | 1914
The opinion, in this case was prepared for the court, by
The defendant in this case was indicted for, and convicted of, murder in the first degree.
The state had a right, for the purpose of impeaching the defendant as a witness, to offer evidence tending to show that he was a man whose general character prior to the homicide was, in the community in which he lived, bad; but, as already stated, under the situation of the evidence in this case, it had no right to show that, prior to the homicide, the defendant’s general character for peace and quiet was, in the community in which he lived, bad.
In the Instant case the trial court seems to have disregarded the above rule.
In this case, so the bill of exceptions recites: The “solicitor, in his closing argument to the jury, made the following argument to the jury: Where is Raymond Smith? How do they account for the fact that Raymond Smith did not testify in this case?’ ”
The defendant seasonably objected to this argument of the- solicitor, but the court overruled the objection, and permitted the argument to remain with the jury.
7. Under the evidence set out in the present bill of exceptions the trial court was free from error in refusing charge C, requested by the defendant. A charge somewhat similar to this charge was held to be good by the Court of of Appeals in Black v. State, 5 Ala. App. 87, 59 South. 692, but we direct attention to the fact that this charge is not a copy of the charge which was held good as applied to the facts in Bluitt v. State, 161 Ala. 14, 49 South. 854.
9. In the above opinion we have discussed all of the questions presented by this record which we deem of importance.
For the errors pointed out the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the court below for further proceedings in accordance with the views above expressed.
Reversed and- remanded.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.