Court Opinion

ID: 9771613
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 16:48:55.252539+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:33.858012
License: Public Domain

WOODLEY, Judge,
dissenting.
Appellant’s counsel submits in his brief five propositions upon which he relies for reversal. The error which my brethren find and upon which a reversal of the conviction is predicated is not mentioned or assigned in the brief and has no relation to either of the propositions there claimed to be the errors which require reversal. Under appellate procedure in our civil courts, and prior to the recent amendment of Art. 759a C.C.P. in this Court, the point would be considered as waived. (It will be observed that the amendments of Art. 759a, Sec. 2, adopted the procedure in civil cases in reference to errors in the admission *354or exclusion of evidence, but thé legislature failed to require assignment of the error as in civil matters, R.C.P. 374 has no counterpart in criminal procedure.)
This dissent is based, however, upon the ground, that the ruling of the court was. not error, under the evidence, but was invited and made admissible by the following cross-examination of the sheriff by appellant’s counsel.
“Q. And you took those two boys’ word out there, as to all this whiskey without a search warrant. You took the'ir word even after they told you they lived there and that they had the place rented? A. We took their sworn statement. .
.“Q. .That’s right.and turned them scotfree aloose didn’t require'them to go before a jury, arid filed on this man just on their word alone ? A. On their'sworn statement alone.
“Q. And their word alone? A. We took a sworn statement.
“Q. And they were the only ones who told you of any kind of connection that this whiskey belonged to Vernon Clay? A. That’s right.
“Q. There was a little deal involved, wasn’t there? A. No, there wasn’t.
“Q. Quite a bit of politics going on about that time? A. Not with that bunch down there there certainly wasn’t.
“Q. Do you usually run your office that way? Have you always been that kind of officer? A. What kind?
“Q. Take two men. and filed on some other man ? A. I would on a sworn statement, yes, sir.
“Q. And a sworn statement makes the difference, is that right? A. It does with me, yes, sir.”
The complaint was made by the sheriff-witness and the jury was informed of that fact when the information was read to them which set out that same was presented “on the written affidavit of Homer Whisnand, a competent and reliable person.” He testified to the finding of the liquor.
The questions propounded to the sheriff on cross-examination above quoted suggested that there was “a little deal” or politics involved in the matter; that the sheriff was the kind of officer who usually ran his office through deals and politics and for *355that reason he filed the complaint against appellant and permitted the occupants of the apartment to go free.
To refute the inference that appellant was charged and the Riggins boys released for some ulterior purpose, the sheriff was properly permitted to show that he released the Riggins boys because he never filed on any man he thought was not guilty.
I respectfully enter my dissent.