Stanfield v. State

One of the principal witnesses for the state was a man named Campbell. This witness testified to a state of facts which, if believed by the jury, beyond a reasonable doubt, would convict the defendant. It was error for the court to refuse to permit the defendant on cross-examination to inquire o-f , this witness, if he expected to receive a part of the $50! fee paid by the state in cases of this character. Any fact tending to show bias or ill! will may be elicited on cross-examination of a witness as bearing on his credibility. Gann v. State, 21 Ala. App. 347, 108 So. 269; Lock v. State, 21…