In Drayton v. State, 596 So. 2d 51 (Ala. Crim. App. 1991), the defendant, in his trial for robbery in the first degree, testified that he had been coerced by means of police mistreatment into making a statement that had been introduced against him. "He further testified that two paramedics were present at the police station during the time that he said a police officer cursed and hit him." (596 So. 2d at 51.) That testimony led to this questioning by the State: "Q. Now, did you subpoena any paramedics to come here and talk about these cuts and bruises that you had on your hands that time? "A. Mr. Meyers defense counsel: Judge, I object to that. "The Court: Overruled. "A. No. "Q. Yet you're saying there were paramedics standing right there. "A. There was paramedics, but I didn't subpoena none of them." (596 So. 2d at 52.) The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed Drayton's conviction, holding that defense counsel's "general objection" was sufficient to preserve error for appellate review because, the court said, "the prosecutor's question about the defendant's not subpoenaing the paramedics was clearly illegal, and there was no way that the question could have been framed ... to make it legal." (596 So. 2d at 52.)