Holbert v. State

Citations

• 9 Tex. Ct. App. 219

Syllabus

<p>1. Evídunce—-Practice. — Questions respecting the mode of examining a witness, or relative to the scope of interrogation allowable in the examination, should be raised and disposed of while the witness is on the stand. Controversy between counsel on such matters cannot be adjusted by requesting special instructions upon them to be given to the jury.</p> <p>2. Same — Impeachment of Witnesses. — In attempting to impeach the credibility of a witness by proof of his general character, the impeaching witness is first to be interrogated upon his knowledge of the general reputation for truth of the assailed witness where the latter resides or is best known. If the impeaching witness appears sufficiently acquainted with such reputation, he should next he asked whether it is good or had; and if he states that it is bad, he may be further asked whether, in view of such reputation, the assailed witness is worthy of belief on his oath, „ but not whether he, the impeaching witness, would believe him.</p> <p>3. Same. — The inquiry must be limited to the general reputation of the assailed witness for truth, and the impeaching witness must predicate his testimony on that reputation, and not upon his personal knowledge or opinion.</p> <p>4. Same. — An impeaching witness is amenable to cross-examination in like manner and to the same extent as other witnesses, and the reputation and credibility of the assailed witness may be vindicated by independent proof.</p>