Case Name: Ingram Chenault PACE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1965-11-24
Citations: 398 S.W.2d 123
Docket Number: No. 38475
Parties: Ingram Chenault PACE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 398
Pages: 123–124

Head Matter:
Ingram Chenault PACE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
No. 38475.
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Nov. 24, 1965.
Rehearing Denied Jan. 19, 1966.
Clyde W. Woody (on appeal only), Houston, for appellant.
Frank Briscoe, Dist. Atty., Carl E. F. Dally, Charles E. Bonney and John Gille-land, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, and Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

Opinion:
MORRISON, Judge.
The offense is driving while intoxicated; the punishment, 20 days in jail and a fine of $150.00.
In view of our disposition of this case a recitation of the facts is not deemed necessary other than to observe that appellant placed his reputation in issue and called several witnesses who testified that his reputa tion for being a peaceable and law abiding citizen was good.
On cross examination of such witnesses, the State was permitted over appellant's objection to ask such witnesses if they had heard that appellant had been charged with speeding in several counties and with running a red light in still another. It was never the intention of this Court to include offenses of this nature when we announced the rule set forth in Vance v. State, 365 S.W.2d 182. We have been cited no authority to support the asking of such questions of a reputation witness, and know of none.
For the error of the Court in permitting the asking of such questions over the repeated objections, the judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.
It is so ordered.