State v. Grant

ARCHIBALD, Justice.

The issue we must face in these appeals is whether the district attorney’s cross-examination of the defendant injected inadmissible and prejudicial evidence to such a degree as to constitute reversible error. Since the issue was appropriately saved by seasonable objection and since the evidence thereby adduced went directly to the credibility of the defendant as a witness, we have concluded that the defendant has demonstrated such error.

We, therefore, sustain the appeals.

The four charges, alleged to have been committed on August 20, 1977, for which the defendant had been…