140 So. 176 | Ala. Ct. App. | 1932
This cause was tried in the circuit court before the judge, sitting without a jury. *26 There were several exceptions reserved by defendant on the admission of testimony. For instance, the state was permitted to prove, over objection and exception by defendant, that at the time the alleged insulting language was used the prosecuting witness was pregnant, and further that, after the alleged insulting language, Mrs. Narmore, a sister of prosecutrix, was sent for by prosecutrix, and, when Mrs. Narmore came, prosecutrix was sitting in a swing on the front porch crying and prosecutrix told then and there what had happened.
The pregnancy of the prosecutrix was irrelevant and incompetent evidence, and related in no way to the alleged insult, and what transpired between prosecutrix and her sister some time after the alleged insult was not a part of the res gestae, nor could the testimony be used to "bolster up" the testimony of prosecutrix. The only effect of this testimony was to prejudice the defendant's cause in the mind of the court who was to pass upon the facts.
There has been a line of decisions, notably Holmes v. State,
A different rule from the above was announced in First National Bank, etc., v. Chaffin et al.,
We cannot apply rule 45 to this case, and, for the errors pointed out, the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded.
Reversed and remanded.