In Ivey, Judge Bowen opined: ". . . [T]he rule stated in Crawford v. State, 262 Ala. 191, 192, 78 So.2d 291 (1955), and Padgett v. State, 49 Ala. App. 130, 136, 269 So.2d 147, cert. denied, 289 Ala. 749, 269 So.2d 154 (1972)" indicates: "This rule states that in a murder prosecution it is not permissible for a witness, including a medical expert, to draw conclusions for the jury as to the relative positions of the parties at the time of the shooting from a mere examination of the wounds.

A large measure of discretion should be given the trial judge in determining the extent to which details of a former difficulty, between the deceased and the accused charged with the murder of the deceased, may be proven. Padgett v. State, 49 Ala. App. 130, 269 So.2d 147, cert. denied, 289 Ala. 749, 269 So.2d 154 (1972). Spain v. State, 37 Ala. App. 311, 68 So.2d 53 (1953).

Robert Straub, Decatur, Charles E. Carmichael, Jr., Tuscumbia, for appellant. Statements made outside presence of defendant, concerning what others said of defendant's whereabouts, are hearsay. Griffin v. State, 155 Ala. 88, 46 So. 481. Reports to arresting officers, made outside the presence of the defendant, as to defendant's intentions on occasion complained of, are hearsay. Kirklin v. State, 168 Ala. 83, 53 So. 253; Newman v. State, 20 Ala. App. 271, 101 So. 508; Berry v. State, 46 Ala. App. 308, 241 So.2d 336. A non-expert is not permitted to testify as to the direction of travel of bullets or pellets. Padgett v. State, 49 Ala. App. 130, 269 So.2d 147, cert den. 289 Ala. 749, 269 So.2d 154; McKee v. State, 82 Ala. 32, 2 So. 451; Humber v. State, 19 Ala. App. 451, 99 So. 68; Richardson v. State, 204 Ala. 124, 85 So. 789; Thigpen v. State, 49 Ala. App. 233, 270 So.2d 66. William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen., Montgomery, and George R. Stuart, III, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Birmingham, for appellee.

Driggers v. State, 36 Ala. App. 637, 61 So.2d 865; Thompson v. State, 39 Ala. App. 569, 105 So.2d 146; Fuller v. State, 45 Ala. App. 133, 226 So.2d 677. Rebuttal testimony of specific prior acts of hostility by the defendant against the victim is admissible for the purpose of showing motive, malice, or intent. Wright v. State, 279 Ala. 543, 188 So.2d 272; Padgett v. State, 49 Ala. App. 130, 269 So.2d 147. BOWEN W. SIMMONS, Supernumerary Circuit Judge.

A limitation is that an expert is not allowed to testify as to the relative positions of the parties at the time a shot is fired. Crawford v. State, 262 Ala. 191, 78 So.2d 291 (1954); McPhearson v. State, 271 Ala. 533, 125 So.2d 709 (1960); Rigell v. State, 8 Ala. App. 46, 62 So. 977 (1913); Roden v. State, 13 Ala. App. 105, 69 So. 366 (1915); Uldric v. State, 43 Ala. App. 477, 192 So.2d 736 (1966); Padgett v. State, 49 Ala. App. 130, 269 So.2d 147 (1972). The jury is equally competent to examine the wounds and draw conclusions as to the relative positions of the parties.

HARWOOD, Justice. Petition of the State by its Attorney General for Certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that Court in Padgett v. State, 49 Ala. App. 130, 269 So.2d 147. Writ denied.

Shiflett v. State, 262 Ala. 337, 78 So.2d 805 (1955); Blue v. State, 246 Ala. 73, 19 So.2d 11 (1944); Padgett v. State, 49 Ala. App. 130, 269 So.2d 147, cert. denied, 289 Ala. 749, 269 So.2d 154 (1972); Mahaley v. State, 36 Ala. App. 89, 53 So.2d 594, cert. denied, 256 Ala. 77, 53 So.2d 595 (1951)." White v. State, 380 So.2d 348, 349-50 (Ala.Cr.App. 1980).

Other cases consistent with Smith also involved claims of accident or self-defense. See Ivey v. State, 369 So.2d 1276, 1281 (Ala.Cr.App.), writ denied, 369 So.2d 1281 (1979); Padgett v. State, 49 Ala. App. 130, 136, 269 So.2d 147, 152 (1972), cert. denied, 289 Ala. 749, 269 So.2d 154 (1972); Crawford v. State, 262 Ala. 191, 78 So.2d 291 (1955). In the present case, the appellant does not contend that the shooting of the two deputies was an accident.

Accord, Smith v. State, 466 So.2d 1026, 1034-35 (Ala.Cr.App. 1985). This rule has been applied to witnesses who attempt to testify as to the positions of the participants based on evidence other than an examination of the victim's wound, see Padgett v. State, 49 Ala. App. 130, 136-37, 269 So.2d 147, 152-53, cert. denied, 289 Ala. 749, 269 So.2d 154 (1972) (trial court erred in permitting officer to testify as to position of defendant when gun was fired based on angle of bullet hole in head board of bed), and the rule is now simply stated that "even an expert may not testify as to the relative positions of the parties before a shot is fired." Sheffield v. State, 392 So.2d 1233, 1237 (Ala.Cr.App. 1980), cert. denied, 392 So.2d 1237 (Ala. 1981).

Richardson v. State, 37 Ala. App. 194, 196, 65 So.2d 715, 717 (1953). See also Wilson v. State, 430 So.2d 891 (Ala.Cr.App. 1983); Ivey v. State, 369 So.2d 1276 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 369 So.2d 1281 (Ala. 1979); Lovell v. State, 51 Ala. App. 286, 284 So.2d 741 (1973); Padgett v. State, 49 Ala. App. 130, 269 So.2d 147, cert. denied, 289 Ala. 749, 269 So.2d 154 (1972); Even though we find that it was improper to permit Dr. Riddick to give his opinion as he did, we find that it was error without injury and that the error did not probably injuriously affect a substantial right of appellant.