
    (97 South. 573)
    Ex parte STATE, ex rel. DAVIS, Atty. Gen. TYLER v. STATE.
    (6 Div. 942.)
    (Supreme Court of Alabama.
    May 24, 1923.
    Rehearing Denied June 28, 1923.)
    Criminal law @=>723(3) — ^Remarks of prosecuting attorney held not reversible error.
    In a murder prosecution, remarks of solicitor in argument to jury, “Wé have got too much killing around here.” “Don’t you know we have?” “Do you know why?” held not ground for reversal.
    <®=oFor other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
    Certiorari to the Court of Appeals.
    Petition of the State of Alabama, on the relation of Harwell G. Davis, its Attorney General, for certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that court in the case of Lon Tyler v. State, 19 Ala. App. 380, 97 South. 573.
    Writ awarded and reversed and remanded.
    Lon Tyler was convicted of manslaughter in the first degree. On the trial, the solicitor in his argument to the jury made these remarks: “We have got too much killing around here.” “Don’t you know we have?” “Do you know why?”
    The circuit court overruled defendant’s objection and motion to exclude, these remarks.
    On appeal to the Court of Appeals,.that court entered judgment reversing the judgment of the trial court because of such ruling. And to review the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the state brings this petition for certiorari.
    Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., and-Lamar Field, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
    
      There was no prejudicial error in overruling defendant’s motion to exclude the argument of the solicitor. Childress v. State, 86 Ala. 86, 5 South. 755; Cross v. State, 68 Ala. 476; Olden v. State, 176 Ala. 6, 58 South. 307; Sharp v. State, 193 Ala. 28, 69 South. 122; Lide v. State, 133 Ala. 50, 31 South. 953; Jackson v. State, 136 Ala. 25, 34 South. 188; Brown v. State, 121 Ala. 11, 25 South. 744; Blalock v. State, 8 Ala. App. 349, 63 South. 26; Dollar v. State, 99 Ala. 236, 13 South. 575.
    Pinkney Scott, of Bessemer, for appellee.
    In support of the holding of the Court of Appeals, counsel cites the authorities cited in that opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

The court is of the opinion, and so holds, that so much of the argument of the solicitor as was made reversible error by the Court of Appeals should not have reversed the judgment of the trial court under the case of Olden v. State, 176 Ala. 6, 58 South. 307. The certiorari is accordingly awarded, and the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the cause is remanded to said court for further action in conformity with this opinion.

Writ awarded and reversed and remanded.

All the Justices concur.  