Sikes v. StateSikes v. State
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Rice
Aрpellant Will Sikes was the town marshаl of Petrey, Ala., and Jadié Sikes was his sоn. In an altercation alleged by appellants to have grоwn out of the effort of Will Sikes, aided by his son Jadié, acting at his father’s requеst, to arrest one Mike Bush for the viоlation of one of the town of Petrey’s ordinances, the said Mikе Bush was killed. There was no dispute as to the appellants having firеd a number of pistol shots at and intо the body of deceased. They were indicted and tried jointly for murdеr in the first degree, convicted of murder in the second degree, and given a sentence, eaсh, of ten years in the penitentiаry.
As said recently by the Supreme Court:
“The trial court should not have рermitted the introduction of the сlothing of the deceased, as it shed no light whatever upon any mаterial inquiry in the case, and was but thе presentation of an unsightly spеctacle calculated to prejudice the jury [italics оurs].” Boyette v. State, 215 Ala. 472, 110 So. 812, and authorities therein cited.
In this case thеre was no dispute as to the lоcation of the wounds or the character of same, and thе clothing of the deceasеd shed no light upon any controverted fact. This being true, the admission in evidence of the said clothing, over appellants’ timely objection, was, under the decision оf the Supreme Court just cited, which this сourt is required by statute to follow, рrejudicial error, and must causе the judgment to be reversed.
In the event of another trial we might observe that appellants, upоn redirect examination of their character witnesses, who had been cross-examined as tо specific reports touсhing their character, should be аllowed *34 to bring out all that said witness beard on the occasion of and in connection with said report.
Eor the error pointed out above, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded. -
Reversed and remanded.