Opinion
July, 1916.
The testimony offered to show prior inconsistent statements of the witness Haslett was not collateral to the issue. If competent, its importance was great. It was excluded expressly by the trial court upon an untenable theory. We think that the exclusion of this evidence worked injury to the defendant. Judgment of conviction and orders reversed and a new trial granted. Thomas, Carr, Rich and Putnam, JJ., concurred; Jenks, P.J., not voting.