Smith v. State

• Decision Date: 07 February 1901
• Citation: 29 So. 699,129 Ala. 89
• Parties: SMITH v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

29 So. 699

129 Ala. 89

SMITH v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

February 7, 1901

Appeal from city court of Gadsden; John H. Disque, Judge.

Lon Smith was convicted of a crime, and appeals. Reversed.

On the trial of the case the woman alleged in the indictment to have been assaulted testified to the circumstances of the assault committed upon her, and of facts tending to show that the assault was made with the intent forcibly to ravish her. She identified the defendant as the person who committed such assault. She testified, among other things, that she worked at a cotton mill, and that while she was going to her work and passing through a dark room to reach the room where she was employed, the defendant grabbed hold of her forcibly, and with one hand caught her by her person just between her legs whereupon she screamed as loud as she could, and the defendant ran away. The evidence for the defendant tended to show an alibi. After the defendant was introduced as a witness, and had testified that he did not assault the person named in the indictment, and was not present at the time the assault was alleged to have been committed, the state introduced in evidence an indictment charging the defendant with an assault and battery, and a judgment of conviction under said indictment, and also an indictment charging the defendant with carrying a pistol concealed about his person and a judgment of conviction under such indictment. The indictments and judgments in each of these cases were introduced against the objection and exception of the defendant. The court stated to the jury that said testimony was admitted "solely for the purpose of affecting the credibility of the defendant as a witness."

P. E Culli, for appellant.

Chas. G. Brown, Atty. Gen., for the State.

TYSON J.

The rule of the common law was that persons convicted of treason felony, and the crimen falsi were rendered infamous, and were disqualified as witnesses in civil and criminal cases. In determining whether a crime is infamous, the test seems to be "whether the crime shows such depravity in the perpetration, or such a disposition to pervert public justice in the courts, as creates a violent presumption against his truthfulness under oath." It was not the severity of punishment, but the nature of the offense, which created legal infamy and disqualification of a witness. Sylvester v. State, 71 Ala. 17; Taylor v. State, 62 Ala. 164. ...