People v. Nobles

[467]

SHENK, J.

The defendant appeals from judgments entered upon verdicts of guilty on counts charging him with the crime of murder in the first degree and of attempted murder, and verdicts that the defendant was sane at the time of the commission of the crimes. The verdict of murder in the first degree was rendered by the jury without recommendation and sentence of death was pronounced as required by law.

Upon the trial of the issues raised by "the pleas of not guilty, the defendant offered himself as a witness in his own behalf. In the course of the cross-examination of the defendant he was asked by the district attorney whether he had ever been convicted of a felony, to which he replied in the negative, and whether or not he had ever been convicted of the crime of assault to murder and served a sentence of eleven years- in the state penitentiary at Huntsville, Texas, to which the same answer was given. The defendant testified that he may have admitted to one of the arresting officers that he had served such a term, but denied that there was any truth in the statement. The district attorney offered in evidence for the purpose of impeachment a copy of a judgment, sentence, mandate and description sheet in the matter of

The People of the State of Texas

v.

Pat Nobles,

certified by the chief of the bureau of records and identification, Texas prison .system, and- acknowledged before a notary public in the state of Texas. The introduction of this evidence was objected to and the objection was sustained by the court on the ground that it was not properly authenticated, the copy being certified only and not exemplified. The district attorney then withdrew the offer. Upon objection sustained to any further attempt to impeach the defendant on the foundation laid upon the cross-examination referred to, the court instructed the jury as follows: “I want to instruct the jury that satisfactory evidence not having been produced of a previous conviction of a felony, you are not to draw any inference from any questions asked or evidence offered that the defendant had previously been convicted of a felony, and for that purpose it will be your duty to consider that the defendant has not previously been convicted of a felony.” Prejudicial error is urged by the defendant by reason of the foregoing proceedings.