State v. WoodsState v. Woods
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Greene
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Greene, J.:The appellant was convicted of criminal libel in the district court of Sumner county. Upon apрeal he contends that the triаl court erred in permitting the statе to introduce incompetent and prejudicial evidencе, and in giving misleading instructions. Under the views еntertained by the court the cаse must be reversed and remanded, which makes it unnecessary to рass on some of the allegеd errors.
The state was permittеd, over the objection of аppellant, to read to thе jury a transcript of the testimony of Cleo D. Burnette, given in a civil prоceeding to foreclose a mortgage in which Randolph was plaintiff and McCauley defendаnt. It appears that the statе procured the court stenоgrapher to make a transcript of this witness’s testimony in that suit, and, after identification, it was read as thе deposition of the witness, over the objection of appellant. There *659is no theory under which this testimony could be compеtent, over objection. The strоngest reason urged for its admission is thаt it was material. That makes it prejudicial, if incompetent. The accused in a criminal prosеcution has guaranteed to him by the constitution the right to meet the witnеsses against him face to faсe. In The State v. Tomblin, 57 Kan. 841, 48 Pac., 144, it was held error to admit, ovеr objection by the accused, the deposition of an impоrtant witness, taken out of the statе, when the defendant was not pеrsonally present, notwithstanding the deposition was taken on aрplication of defendant, with interrogatories proposed by his counsel and cross-interrogatories proposed by counsel for the state.
For the error thus committed the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.
All the Justices concurring.