Treadway v. State

Citations

• 1 Tex. Ct. App. 668

Syllabus

<p>1. Evidence to Contradict a Witness.—In order to impeach the credit of a witness by introducing his verbal statements out of court; contradictory of his testimony, it is necessary first to interrogate him respecting the time, place, and person involved in the supposed contradictory- statements.</p> <p>'2. Same.—The court below refused to allow the accused to recall a state’s witness for the purpose of laying the predicate for impeaching his credit by proof that he had made statements contradictory of his testimony. Held, that the allowance of the recall for the purpose specified was a. matter confided to the discretion of the judge, a quo, and his action upon it, will not be revised by this court when the record fails to show that the-recall was necessary to a due administration of justice. The ruling to the-contrary in Harvey v. The State, 37 Texas, 365, is controverted as a general rule.</p> <p>3. Reasonable Doubt.—In the trial of felonies the doctrine of reasonable - doubt should, whether asked or not, be given in charge to the jury; and. in the trial of misdemeanors it should be given whenever asked.</p>