Opinion

Curry v. State

  • 72 Tex. Crim. 463
  • 162 S.W. 851
  • 1913 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 662
Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Filed
Dec 10, 1913
Status
Published
Author
Davidson
On the bench
Davidson, Harper, Prendergast
Cited by
10 cases
Authority
More cited than 1.5%

The opinion

DAVIDSON, Judge

(dissents), cites opinion on former appeal. The impeachment of the witnesses was error.

HARPER, Judge.

I agree to the affirmance of this case as I think

*481

the authorities sufficient under the holding in the Nash case, 61 Texas Crim. Rep., 259 . As to the questions asked the witness Dwiggins, I think it was permissible to ask him if “he had not been turned out of the church on account of trouble with the McFarlin family,” as showing ill-will, bias, etc., and the court did not err in overruling the objection to this question. But when the witness answered that it was not true, the State should not have been permitted to ask him if it was not a fact that he had been turned out of the church, unless they intended to connect up the matter with the McFarlin family. But, inasmuch as the defendant proved that he was church clerk to support his testimony, this latter question, and the answer thereto, under the record in this case, would not present reversible error, although in the opinion of the writer improper.

[Rehearing denied January 14, 1914.—Reporter.]

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.