Busby v. State

116 Ala. 453
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedNovember 15, 1897
StatusPublished

This text of 116 Ala. 453 (Busby v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Busby v. State, 116 Ala. 453 (Ala. 1897).

Opinion

COLEMAN, J.

The defendant was indicted and convicted of the offense of grand larceny. The only exception reserved upon the trial was that of the refusal of the court to give the instruction to the jury which appears in the statement of the case. As framed the instruction is not clear, and considered in connection with the facts of the case, was calculated to confuse the jury. We presume, the pleader intended to embody the principle supposed to be asserted in Lunsford v. Dietrich, 93 Ala., top of page 571, but the phraseology of the instruction requested, and its connection, fails to carry the same meaning, and the principle was no.t applicable. The true rule applicable to the case of appellant is stated in Higgs v. The State, 113 Ala. 36.

There is no error in the record.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Higgs v. State
113 Ala. 36 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1896)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
116 Ala. 453, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/busby-v-state-ala-1897.