State v. Ybarra

McFarland, justice.

Appellant was convicted of the crime of illegal sale of narcotic drug, ■ a felony, in violation of A.R.S. § 36-1002.02 (1961). From the judgment and sentence he appeals. Appellant, hereinafter referred to as defendant, urges as the basis for his appeal that prejudicial error resulted from the answers to two questions of his counsel on cross-examination of Madrid.

The first which he assigns as error was as follows:

“BY DEFENSE COUNSEL:

“Q. What was Jesse Contreras Saenz, Jr.’s address at the time of March the 1st?

“THE WITNESS: Your Honor, do I have to answer that? We hate to…