Cox v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Cox v. State

56 So. 775, 2 Ala. App. 143, 1911 Ala. App. LEXIS 38

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 23, 1911

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 56 So. 775 (Cox v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Alabama Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cox v. State, 56 So. 775, 2 Ala. App. 143, 1911 Ala. App. LEXIS 38 (Ala. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

WALKER, P. J.

There was evidence tending to show that the defendant sold the rock, with the larceny of which he was charged, to one Andrew Law, who, in innnocence of any criminal purpose in reference to it, removed it from the place where, the owner had it. Larceny may be committed by a sale of personal property belonging to another to an innocent purchaser, the latter taking it from the possession of the owner.—25 Cyc. 58; Walls v. State, 43 Tex. Cr. R. 70, 63 S. W. 328; Washington v. State, 106 Ala. 58, 17 South. 546. With this evidence in the case, the court was not in error in overruling the motion to exclude the testimony offered by the state, nor in refusing to give the affirmative charge in his behalf requested by the defendant.

Affirmed.

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

WALKER, P. J.

There was evidence tending to show that the defendant sold the rock, with the larceny of which he was charged, to one Andrew Law, who, in innnocence of any criminal purpose in reference to it, removed it from the place where, the owner had it. Larceny may be committed by a sale of personal property belonging to another to an innocent purchaser, the latter taking it from the possession of the owner.—25 Cyc. 58; Walls v. State, 43 Tex. Cr. R. 70, 63 S. W. 328; Washington v. State, 106 Ala. 58, 17 South. 546. With this evidence in the case, the court was not in error in overruling the motion to exclude the testimony offered by the state, nor in refusing to give the affirmative charge in his behalf requested by the defendant.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

56 So. 775, 2 Ala. App. 143, 1911 Ala. App. LEXIS 38, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cox-v-state-alactapp-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack