86 Ala. 617 | Ala. | 1888
The trial court correctly disallowed all peremptory challenges in excess of the number prescribed by the act of 1887.
The appellant and one Finch were jointly indicted. On a former trial, Finch had been convicted and sentenced to a
The objection to the admission of the testimony of Daniel Kirkland was general, going to the whole of his evidence, a great part of which was clearly 'competent. Granting that some of this evidence was illegal (which, however, we do not decide), the objection was too general and indefinite, and on this ground was properly overruled. — 3 Brick. Dig. p. 443, §§ 567 et seq.
This evidence sufficiently showed that the witness, Kit Kirkland, was permanently absent from the State, and furnished a predicate for evidence of his testimony as given on a former trial of the case.—Lowe v. State, 86 Ala. 47; s. c. 5 So. Rep. 435.
The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.