Court Opinion

ID: 9645105
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 21:12:50.56518+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:05:01.078394
License: Public Domain

ON APPELLANT’S MOTION FOR REHEARING
McDonald, judge.
In his motion for rehearing appellant strenuously and ably insists that this court erred in holding state’s exhibits No. 1 and No. 2 admissible as bearing on the lascivious intent of the appellant.
The statement of facts reveals that the careful trial judge twice rejected the state’s tender of the two photographs into the evidence and that he did not admit them until the appellant took the stand in his own behalf and properly identified them.
In addition to being admissible to show lascivious intent, the two exhibits were admissible as part of the res gestae. They were taken by the appellant, himself, at the time of the transaction. Acts done, statements and appearance of the participants, and other similar circumstances are all admissible as part of the res gestae when a witness narrates the events surrounding an offense.
All the cases cited by the appellant deal with photographs taken by others, not by the appellant. Here, the appellant took the photographs, himself.
The motion for rehearing is denied.