TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Wilkerson v. State

Wilkerson v. State.

Wilkerson v. State, 129 So. 722 (Ala. 1930)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Alabama · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 26, 1930
Docket
No. 4 Div. 507.
Judges
Anderson
Citations
129 So. 722221 Ala. 4531930 Ala. LEXIS 356

Opinion of the Court — Anderson

ANDERSON, C. J.

It appears from the opinion of the Court , of Appeals that one Jones, who had testified for the defendant, upon. recross-examination by the state, said: “ ‘Mr. Blair is in the penitentiary I suppose.’ No objection • — no exception. Defendant then asked: ‘He is in the penitentiary about a killing case, isn’t he?’ The court sustained the state’s objection to- this question. The question called for evidence irrelevant to the issue being tried.”

When the state brought out this evidence, whether relevant or not, the defendant had the right to cross-examine as to same. L. & N. R. Co. v. Quinn, 146 Ala. 330 , 39 So. 756 ; L.

& N. R. Co. v. Hill, 115 Ala. 334 , 22 So. 163 ;

*454 Winslow v. State, 92 Ala. 78 , 9 So. 728 ; Valin v. McKerreghan, 104 Mich. 213 , 62 N. W. 340 .

We therefore think and so hold that the opinion of the Court of Appeals discloses error upon the face of same. We may add, by way of suggestion, that the question asked was not irrelevant after the witness had stated that Blair was in the penitentiary. It seems that this defendant was indicted jointly with others, including one Blair, and the fact that Blair was then in- the penitentiary tended to impress the jury with the fact that he had been convicted for the same offense, and that this defendant had the right to show he was there for some other offense.

The writ is awarded, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the cause is remanded to said court for further consideration in conformity with this opinion.

All the Justices concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1957: 11978: 119572026peak 1957 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Van Antwerp v. State358 So. 2d 782 (Ala. Crim. App. 1978)
  2. Duck v. State92 So. 2d 55 (Ala. Ct. App. 1957)

Most recent

  1. Van Antwerp v. State358 So. 2d 782 (Ala. Crim. App. 1978)
  2. Duck v. State92 So. 2d 55 (Ala. Ct. App. 1957)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
L. & N. R. R. v. Quinn, 39 So. 756 (Ala. 1905) 9
Valin v. McKerreghan, 62 N.W. 340 (Mich. 1895) 5
Louisville & Nashville R.R. v. Hill, 115 Ala. 334 (1896) 20
Winslow v. State, 92 Ala. 78 (1890) 12

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list