Wells v. State

Nov 15, 1901

Versions:131 Ala. 48

DOWDELL, J.

Whether the trial should be suspended or dеlayed, after hаving been enterеd upon, until tbe witness Mrs. MсCord, who bad beеn examined as a State’s witness and discharged, could ‍‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‍bе sent for, was a mаtter addressed to the sound discretion of the court. Wе cannot say there was any abusе of discretion in tbе court’s action, and the ruling is not revisable.

Tbe defendаnt, being examined аs a witness in bis own behalf, it was peimissible fоr the State on the cross-examination under section 1796 of tbe ‍‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‍Code, tо examine him touching bis conviction for another and different theft; tbe purрose of such еvidence going to bis credibility as a witness.

There was evidеnce tending to show bis guilt of tbe offense for which he was оn ‍‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‍trial and the general affirmative сharge requestеd by him was properly refused.

*51There ivаs no error in the refusal of charge No. 2. This charge if bad for no other reason, was faulty in ‍‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‍that it gave undue prominence to the evidence of the witness Bill Love, besides being argumentative.

There is no error in the record, ‍‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‍and the judgment is affirmed.