Carlisle v. State
77 Ala. 71
Opinion
The defendant was tried and convicted for obtaining money under false pretenses. He offered testimony tending the show, that, two or three weeks after the money was obtained, he offered to repay it, with some interest. This testimony was ruled out, and he excepted.
The testimony could not tend to disprove anything alleged against the defendant, nor was it part of the res gestee, so as to shed light on the intent with which he uttered the pretense, alleged to be false and fraudulent. There is no error in the record.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Carlisle v. State, 77 Ala. 71 (Ala. 1884).
77 Ala. 71 (Carlisle v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Bush v. State
942 So. 2d 392 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 2005)
Ex Parte Rosborough III
909 So. 2d 772 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 2004)
Taylor v. State
238 So. 2d 902 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1970)
Edwards v. State
227 So. 2d 134 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1969)
Elliott v. Caheen Bros.
153 So. 613 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1934)
Prentice v. State
139 So. 437 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1932)
Cook v. State
104 So. 837 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1925)
Clagett v. United States
289 F. 532 (D.C. Circuit, 1923)
Hendrix v. State
82 So. 564 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1919)
State v. Cadwell
179 P. 87 (Washington Supreme Court, 1919)
Gardner v. State
58 So. 1001 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1912)
Meek v. State
117 Ala. 116 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1897)