Brewer v. State

121 So. 447, 23 Ala. App. 95, 1929 Ala. App. LEXIS 85
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Brewer v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 23 Ala. App. 116
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided March 26, 1929·No. 8 Div. 759.·Published

Opinion

SAMFORD, J.

The evidence for the state, while somewhat uncertain as to some particulars, was sufficient, if believed beyond a reasonable doubt, to make out the state’s case.

In locating the home of defendant where the evidence tends to show -the whisky was sold, it was competent for the witnesses to describe the premises on the day of the illegal sale, and in doing so it was relevant to show that among other things there were a number of goats around the place. After this testimony was in, it was relevant to permit the witness Hudson to describe defendant’s place and its location, including the goats. All this was of the res gestae.

We find no prejudicial error in the record, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Brewer v. State, 121 So. 447, 23 Ala. App. 95, 1929 Ala. App. LEXIS 85 (Ala. Ct. App. 1929).

121 So. 447 (Brewer v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.