Williams v. State

Citations

• 119 Miss. 559
• 81 So. 238

Syllabus

<p>1. Witnesses. Knowledge. Character of defendant.</p> <p>In a prosecution for larceny, a witness who had known the defendant for six or eight years could testify as to his character for honesty and integrity although • he had never heard de-fendafit’s character discussed, since the best character is generally that which is least talked about, and the best evidence of good character, is that the witness has been thoroughly acquainted with the party for years, and never heard any thing against his character.</p> <p>2.' Same.</p> <p>A witness may well say that he knows the general reputation of a person, and that it is good, if he has known the person long and well, and never heard his character questioned, and such testimony is admissible to prove good character.</p> <p>3. Criminal Law. Review. Opinion drought out on cross-examination.</p> <p>Where a witness’ personal opinion of - defendant's character is</p> <p>brought out on cross-examination by the state, the state cannot object to such opinion and even if incompetent, it would not affect the other portions of his testimony.</p> <p>4. Witness. Knowledge. Testimony as to' character.</p> <p>Where in a prosecution for larceny a witness testified that the defendant’s reputation for honesty and integrity was good, his testimony was properly excluded where it did not appear therefrom, that he had known the defendant for any appreciable length of time or had been in a position where he probably would have heard his reputation discussed had it been the subject of comment.</p> <p>5: Criminal Law. Exclusion of evidence. Reversible error.</p> <p>Where in a prosecution for larceny, the evidence was close, it wash reversible error to exclude testimony of defendant’s good character for honesty and integrity since such testimony may have turned the scales in his favor.</p>