Adams v. State
90 So. 42, 18 Ala. App. 143, 1921 Ala. App. LEXIS 117
Opinion
We have carefully examined the evidence in this case, and are of the opinion that the evidence for the state is not sufficient upon which to base a conviction, and that the affirmative charge as requested by the defendant should have been given. Mitchell v. State, ante, p. 119, 89 South. 98.
For this error the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded.
Reversed and remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Adams v. State, 90 So. 42, 18 Ala. App. 143, 1921 Ala. App. LEXIS 117 (Ala. Ct. App. 1921).
90 So. 42 (Adams v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Leith v. State
101 So. 336 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1924)
Watts v. State
98 So. 914 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1924)
Wheat v. State
98 So. 698 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1924)
Dawkins v. State
98 So. 492 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1923)
Knight v. State
97 So. 163 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1923)
Koonce v. State
93 So. 214 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1922)