Cagle v. State

87 Ala. 38
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided December 15, 1888·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

McCLELLAN, J.

The bill of exceptions shows that the defendant was present, and aided and abetted in the sale of spirituous liquor to a minor. The fact that she did not own the whiskey, and received nothing for it, constituted no defense.—State v. Hill, 62 Ala. 168. Nor is she any the less guilty, because what she did in measuring and delivering the liquor to the minor was done at the request or command of her mother, to whom it belonged, and who received the price of it.—1 Bish. Cr. Law, §§ 355, 367; People v. Richmond, 29 Cal. 414. There was no error in giving the general charge at the instance of the State, nor in refusing the charge asked by the defendant.

Affirmed.

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

Cagle v. State, 87 Ala. 38 (Ala. 1888).

87 Ala. 38 (Cagle v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Warren v. State
72 So. 624 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1916)
Bowen v. State
131 Ala. 39 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1901)
Bonds v. State
130 Ala. 117 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1900)
Gilmore v. State
125 Ala. 59 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1899)
Jones v. State
96 Ala. 56 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1892)
Green v. State
97 Ala. 59 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1892)