Boyette v. State
| Decision Date | 16 December 1926 |
| Docket Number | 6 Div. 648 |
| Parties | BOYETTE v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Rehearing Denied Jan. 20, 1927
Appeal from Circuit Court, Marion County; R.L. Blanton, Judge.
Howard Boyette was convicted of murder in the second degree, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.
E.B Fite and Mitchell & Ford, all of Hamilton, for appellant.
Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., and Chas. H. Brown, Asst. Atty. Gen for the State.
As a rule, when a defendant's general character is put in issue, the evidence should be confined to the time of and anterior to the alleged commission of the offense to which he was being tried. White v. State, 111 Ala. 92, 21 So 330. When, however, character evidence is offered to discredit a witness who has testified, it can include all time anterior to the time said witness testifies. The defendant did not put his general character in issue, and the state had no right to do so except so far as it may have affected his credibility as a witness, and the trial court erred in not limiting the character evidence to this purpose over the repeated objections and requests of the defendant. Nor was this evidence limited by the oral charge of the court to this purpose, if such could suffice, which we need not decide. On the other hand, most of the answers of the witness went to the general bad character of the defendant and not whether or not he was worthy of belief.
The trial court should not have permitted the introduction of the clothing of the deceased, as it shed no light whatever upon any material inquiry in the case, and was but the presentation of an unsightly spectacle calculated to prejudice the jury. There was no dispute as to the location of the wounds or the character of same on or about the head and the bloody clothing of the deceased shed no light upon any controverted fact. The clothes worn by the deceased should never be offered in evidence unless they "have some tendency to shed light upon some material inquiry." Louisville & N.R. Co. v. Pearson, 97 Ala. 219, 12 So. 176; A.G.S.R.R. v. Bell,
200 Ala. 562, 76 So. 920; Rollings v. State, 160 Ala. 82, 49 So. 329; Crenshaw v. State, 207 Ala. 438, 93 So. 465.
The trial court committed no reversible error as to any of the other rulings.
For the errors above indicated, the judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the cause is remanded.
Reversed and remanded.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Barbour v. State
... ... 711, 713; Hyche v. State, 22 Ala.App. 176, 113 So. 644, certiorari denied 217 Ala. 114, 114 So. 906; Pierce v. State, 28 Ala.App. 40, 178 So. 248.' ... The appellant insists that the admission in evidence of these articles of clothing was error and relies on Boyette v. State, 215 Ala. 472, 110 So. 812, and Langley v. State, 32 Ala.App. 163, 22 So.2d 920, certiorari denied 247 Ala. 176, 22 So.2d 923, in support of this contention. The ... Page 340 ... decision in Langley v. State, supra [32 Ala.App. 163, 22 So.2d 922], relies strongly on the Boyette case, ... ...
-
Kabase v. State
... ... Of ... course, unless the shoes tended to shed some light upon the ... inquiry at issue, they were inadmissible. Husch v ... State, 211 Ala. 274, 100 So. 321; Moore v. State, ... Ala.App., 9 So.2d 146; Sikes v. State, 22 ... Ala.App. 33, 111 So. 760; Boyette v. State, 215 Ala ... 472, 110 So. 812; Hyche v. State, 22 Ala.App. 176, ... 113 So. 644. It was not shown that the heels of ... [12 So.2d 763] ... the shoes were lost or kicked off in her alleged struggle ... with Ellis, nor, so far as appears from record, were the ... heels found at the ... ...
-
King v. State, 1 Div. 456
...the witness, and may not be considered as substantive evidence." 98 C.J.S. Witnesses § 537 at p. 474 (1957). See also Boyette v. State, 215 Ala. 472, 110 So. 812 (1926) ("The defendant did not put his general character in issue, and the state had no right to do so except so far as it may ha......
-
Flannagin v. State
...prejudice the jurors. * * *' (Emphasis supplied.) We believe that the Court of Criminal Appeals correctly distinguished Boyette v. State, 215 Ala. 472, 110 So. 812, in which a judgment of conviction was reversed for improper admission of deceased's clothing, from those cases which state the......