Byrd v. State
123 So. 924, 23 Ala. App. 613
Opinion
Defendant was convicted on a charge of unlawfully possessing a still. The corpus delicti was proven, but there is no evidence connecting this defendant with the possession of the still. The defendant was entitled to the general affirmative charge. Clark v. State, 18 Ala. App. 217, 90 So. 16; Koonce v. State, 18 Ala. App. 438, 93 So. 214; Knight v. State, 19 Ala. App. 296, 97 So. 163.
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
Byrd v. State, 123 So. 924, 23 Ala. App. 613 (Ala. Ct. App. 1929).
123 So. 924 (Byrd v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Clark v. State
90 So. 16 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1921)
Koonce v. State
93 So. 214 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1922)
Knight v. State
97 So. 163 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1923)