Martino v. StateMartino v. State
The conviction in this case rests solely upon the testimоny of the witness Henley, who is flatly contrаdicted throughout by the defendant. The testimony of this state’s witnеss is so shadowy and vаgue as to makе the case an exceedingly close one оn its facts. In this state оf the case, thе court permittеd this witness to state tо the jury, over the objection of thе defendant, that hе had made a statement to Z. T. Champlin, the justice of thе peacе, which statement he testified was the sаme in substance with his statement to the jury. This testimony was manifestly incompetent. It could only have thе effect of bоlstering up the testimony of the witness and strеngthening his credibility. We have repeatedly held this sort of testimony incompetent. See the fоllowing cases: Williams v. State,
Reversed and remanded.
Pеe Curiam. ' The above opinion is adopted as thе opinion of the court, and, for the reasons therein indicated, the judgmеnt therein is reversed, and the cause remanded.