Wittikind v. State

MAUCK, PJ.

There is one manifest error in the record. The state called as a witness the clerk of the police court. The witness was asked whether there were any records of previous convictions of the defendant for trafficking in liquor. Over the objection of the defendant he testified that there were. He then testified in detail to a former conviction of the accused under a charge of unlawfully possessing intoxicating liquor in the court of the mayor of the city. This was clearly erroneous. The general rule is that in the prosecution of one offense it is not competent to show that the accused…