
    WOODS v. STATE.
    (No. 4493.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    May 30, 1917.)
    1. Cbiminal Law <§=^419, 420(1) — Heaesay Evidence.
    Testimony of witnesses, having heard men say they had had intercourse with defendant, tried on a charge of being a prostitute, was hearsay.
    [Ed. Note. — Eor other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 973, 975, 976, 980-983.1
    2. Cbiminal Law <®^=>1169(1) — Pbejudicial Ekeoe.
    Admission of hearsay, there being little without it to establish the charge, was prejudicial error.
    [Ed. Note. — Eor other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 3130, 3137.]
    Appeal from Jefferson County Court, at Law; D. P. Wheat, Judge.
    Nellie Woods was convicted, and appeals.
    Reversed and remanded.
    W. R. Blain, of Beaumont, for appellant. E. B. Hendricks, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   MORROW, J,

Appellant, on a charge of vagrancy, was convicted, and her punishment 'assessed at a fine of $125. The complaint charged that she was a common prostitute, and pursued the occcupation of selling her person for illicit carnal intercourse.

Bills of exception Nos. 1 and 2 complain that the court, over appellant’s objection, permitted the state to prove by witnesses that they had heard several men-say they had had intercourse with appellant and paid her for it. We think this testimony should have been excluded under the rule of evidence which declares hearsay inadmissible. Cases listed, Branch’s Ann. P. C. p. 65.

Without this testimony there is very little in the record to establish the truth of the allegations in the complaint. Its admission was material and hurtful error, requiring a reversal of the judgment of the lower court.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause-remanded.  