From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barber v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Apr 1, 1959
324 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1959)

Opinion

No. 30478.

April 1, 1959.

Appeal from the County Court, Midland County, Noel D. Cason, J.

Warren Burnett, Mike Berry, Odessa, for appellant.

Leonard Howell, County Atty., Midland, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.


The offense is driving while intoxicated; the punishment, three days in jail and a fine of $50.

Our prior opinion dismissing the appeal is withdrawn.

Our disposition of this case makes unnecessary a statement of the facts. Appellant's bill of exception reflects that he called six witnesses who would have, had they been permitted to do so, testified that appellant's reputation as a sober, peaceable and law abiding citizen was good. The reason for the court's exclusion of such testimony was that they had never heard appellant's reputation discussed.

In Gilson v. State, 140 Tex.Crim. R., 145 S.W.2d 182, 183, this Court said:

"A witness who testifies that he knows the general reputation of the accused as a peaceable and law-abiding man should be permitted to testify that such general reputation in that respect is good, notwithstanding such witness states that he has never heard that reputation discussed in the community."

See also Henderson v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 39 S.W. 116; Rose v. State, 92 Tex.Crim. R., 244 S.W. 1009; Ewing v. State 120 Tex.Crim. 137, 49 S.W.2d 450; Weatherall v. State, 159 Tex.Crim. 415, 264 S.W.2d 429; and Shelton v. Belknap, Tex., 282 S.W.2d 682.

For the error shown, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.


Summaries of

Barber v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Apr 1, 1959
324 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1959)
Case details for

Barber v. State

Case Details

Full title:Billy J. BARBER, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Apr 1, 1959

Citations

324 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1959)
168 Tex. Crim. 168

Citing Cases

Thomas v. State

An accused is allowed to introduce evidence of a specific good character trait to show that it is improbable…

Skelton v. State

The State's cross-examination of the witnesses demonstrated that each witness had not heard appellant's…