Brown v. State
99 So. 156, 19 Ala. App. 574, 1924 Ala. App. LEXIS 38
Opinion
Defendant was convicted on a charge of manufacturing whisky, and appeals.
The defendant has had a fair trial before a jury of his peers, who on their oaths say he is guilty. There was evidence from which an inference of guilt could be predicated. When this is the case, the appellate court is not justified in disturbing the verdict.
. There is no 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
Brown v. State, 99 So. 156, 19 Ala. App. 574, 1924 Ala. App. LEXIS 38 (Ala. Ct. App. 1924).
99 So. 156 (Brown v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hewitt v. State
102 So. 489 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1924)