Dudley v. State
| Decision Date | 02 November 1887 |
| Citation | 5 S.W. 649 |
| Parties | DUDLEY v. STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from district court, Waller county; W. H. BURKHART, Judge.
Conviction for robbery. Penalty assessed at 10 years in the penitentiary. The defense objected to the competency of the state's main witness, because, having been convicted of a felony, he was not competent to testify under a partial or conditional pardon and not a full pardon. Having permitted the witness to testify, the trial court refused to permit the defense, as a means of attacking the credibility of the witness, to introduce the record of his conviction.
Harvey & Browne, for appellant. Asst. Atty. Gen. Davidson, for the State.
With commendable and characteristic candor and fairness the assistant attorney general confesses errors in this conviction, to-wit: (1) It was error to permit the witness Schulz to testify as a witness in behalf of the state, over the defendant's objection, it being shown that said witness had been convicted of felony in this state, which conviction had not been legally set aside, and the said witness not having been legally pardoned for the crime of which he had been convicted; said witness having been conditionally pardoned only. Carr v. State, 19 Tex. App. 635. (2) It was error to reject, when offered as evidence by the defendant, the judgment of conviction showing the conviction of said witness Schulz of a felony. This testimony was offered for the purpose of affecting the credibility of said witness, and for such purpose was admissible. Bennett v. State, ante, 527.
Because of said errors the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Serfling
... ... 2612; 2 Elliott on Evidence, § 791; ... Wormley v. State, 65 Tex. Cr. R. 48, 143 S.W. 615; ... Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Gibson, 42 Tex.Civ.App ... 306, 93 S.W. 469; Bennett v. State, 24 Tex.App. 73, ... 5 S.W. 527, 5 Am. St. Rep. 875; Dudley v. State, 24 ... Tex.App. 163, 5 S.W. 649; Gallagher v. People, 211 ... Ill. 158, 71 N.E. 842 ... It is ... not necessary for us to decide whether evidence of a pardon ... is material, because this testimony was received. We simply ... decide that proof ... ...
-
Gaskins v. State
...See Carr v. State, 19 Tex. App. 635, and authorities there cited; McGee v. State, 29 Tex. App. 596, 16 S. W. 422; Dudley v. State, 24 Tex. App. 163, 5 S. W. 649. See, also, People v. Bowen, 43 Cal. 439; Blanc v. Rodgers, 49 Cal. HURT, P. J. (dissenting). This is a conviction for swindling, ......
-
Bailey v. State
...did not have the effect of rendering the witness competent to testify. McGee v. State, 29 Tex. App. 596, 16 S. W. 422; Dudley v. State, 24 Tex. App. 163, 5 S. W. 649; Carr v. State, 19 Tex. App. 635, 53 Am. Rep. 395. Inasmuch as the witness had been finally convicted of a felony prior to th......