Opinion

Fawcett v. State

  • 152 Tex. Crim. 292
  • 213 S.W.2d 830
  • 1948 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1285
Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Filed
Jun 9, 1948
Status
Published
Author
Davidson
On the bench
Graves, Davidson
Cited by
3 cases

evidence used to impeach defense witness that could be used for other prejudicial purpose, requires instruction

How later courts described this case

  • evidence used to impeach defense witness that could be used for other prejudicial purpose, requires instruction

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

on state’s motion for rehearing.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

We have again reviewed the record in the light of the State’s motion for rehearing, and remain convinced that the testimony showing the grandmother complained in 1946 to the assistant county attorney that appellant had failed to support his children was error, especially in view of the fact that such testimony was not limited before the jury to impeachment purposes only.

In this conclusion, we are not determining that a limiting charge would have cured the error, against a contention that the testimony, though impeaching, was upon an immaterial matter. The question is neither presented nor decided.-

Believing that the case was correctly disposed of originally, the State’s motion for rehearing is overruled.

Opinion approved by the Court.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.