Court Opinion

ID: 9675703
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 05:03:00.463282+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:37.615544
License: Public Domain

CATES, Presiding Judge
(concurring):
I agree with Judge Harris.
Because of the need for a new trial, I also think there was additional reversible error in the refusal of the trial judge to strike out (on defendant’s motion) a volunteered response of a State witness.
The record shows:
“Q. Officer Johnson, around 4:00 o’clock in the afternoon of that day, did you have occasion to be on Highway 63?
“A. I did.
“Q. What was the purpose ?
“A. I had received a call on a car.
“Q. What kind of car was that ?
“A. Black and red — ’68 Ford. Ran two cars off the road, just south of Alex City.
“TOM RADNEY — We are going to object, and move to exclude that, he couldn’t possibly know, unless he saw it, that the man ran anybody off the road. Move to exclude that from the jury, please the Court.
“COURT — Overrule that. He said he had a ‘call.’ ” ,
This was patently inadmissible and moreover was prejudicial. Ivory v. State, 237 Ala. 344, 186 So. 460.
TYSON and HARRIS, JJ., concur herein.