Court Opinion

ID: 9643361
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 20:27:12.740869+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:11:00.007474
License: Public Domain

WOODLEY, Judge
(dissenting).
The majority reaffirm the holding in Washburn v. State, 299 S.W.2d 706, that it is prejudicial error to permit the state ,to call a co-defendant to the stand and require him to claim his privilege and refuse to testify in the presence of the jury, and approve the rule quoted with approval in Washburn v. State: “Unless the witness has agreed to turn state’s evidence, the prosecution ought not to place him on the stand; to do so and wring from him a refusal to testify, affording to the jury an ■opportunity to consider the refusal as a circumstance of guilt, has been said to be ‘certainly prejudicial.’ ”
Despite the fact that Bohannon was represented by one of the counsel who represented the appellant, and he had not agreed to turn state’s evidence and it would Rave been prejudicial error for the state to have called him as a witness at appellant’s trial, the majority set aside her conviction upon the ground that one of her ■counsel was not permitted to argue the ■state’s failure to call Bohannon and commit the prejudicial error.
■ To such holding I respectfully dissent.,