Cancell v. State

132 So. 607, 24 Ala. App. 197, 1931 Ala. App. LEXIS 205
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided February 10, 1931·No. 8 Div. 299.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

RICE, J.

Appellant was convicted' of the offense of petit larceny.

The property alleged to have been stolen — several gallons of gasoline — was charged, in the affidavit upon which appellant was tried, to have been the property of “Franklin County.” This was sufficient, as against the demurrers interposed. Sands et al. v. State, 80 Ala. 201.

The testimony offered on behalf of the state tended directly to show the guilt of appellant as charged; that offered on behalf of appellant was in denial. The issues were for the jury. We discover nothing worthy of further comment.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Cancell v. State, 132 So. 607, 24 Ala. App. 197, 1931 Ala. App. LEXIS 205 (Ala. Ct. App. 1931).

132 So. 607 (Cancell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hill v. State
296 So. 2d 921 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1974)