Hooper v. State

Upon the trial of this cause the state was permitted in its evidence in chief to introduce an information against appellant, charging him with a violation of the prohibitory liquor law. To this exceptions were reserved. This evidence was improperly admitted, without further proof that it was' in some manner connected with the offense for which appellant was upon trial. If appellant had been, convicted of bootlegging, this fact might have been proven for the purpose of affecting his credibility as a witness. See Hendrix v. State, 4 Okla. Cr 611, 113 Pac. 244. But the mere fact that he had been…