Howard v. State

Feb 17, 1931
8 Div. 94.
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Rice
RICE, J.

Appellant was convicted, on a trial under a charge, contained in an affidavit, of ‍​‌‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌​‍operating a motor vehicle upon a public highway recklessly, etc.

It appears that some of the witnesses, testifying for the state, were allowed, over appellant’s timely objection, to say that’ ‍​‌‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌​‍they “were injured” in the claimed collision between the car in which witness was riding and the truck driven by appellant.

The circumstances surrounding the occurrence, i. e., the passing ‍​‌‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌​‍by appellant’s truck (so to denominate the truck he was driving) of the car occupied by the state’s witnesses, were properly allowed to be detailed in the testimony. But ‍​‌‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌​‍as to whether or not any of the state’s witnesses suffered “injury” seems to us, and we hold it to be, irrelevant to the issues. For the error in ‍​‌‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌​‍admitting such testimony the judgment of conviction is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.