Dejarnette v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Dejarnette v. State

121 So. 921, 23 Ala. App. 620

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 26, 1929

Docket6 Div. 391.

StatusPublished

This text of 121 So. 921 (Dejarnette 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

Dejarnette v. State, 121 So. 921, 23 Ala. App. 620 (Ala. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, P. J.

Appellant was indicted for murder in the first degree, the specific charge therein being that he unlawfully and with malice aforethought killed Eddie Rice, by shooting him with a pistol. Upon being tried, he was convicted for the offense of murder in the second degree, and the jury fixed his punishment at 15 years’ imprisonment. Judgment was duly entered and sentence pronounced in accordance with the verdict. He appealed to this court.

The evidence showed without dispute that appellant did kill the said Eddie Rice by shooting him with a pistol. He relied upon self-defense to justify him. The facts and circumstances attending the killing, as shown by the evidence, were-in sharp conflict, thus presenting questions for the determination of the jury. We have carefully examined the exceptions reserved to the court’s rulings upon the admission of evidence. These exceptions, and certain refused charges, present the only point of decision for our consideration, as no motion for a new trial was made. In our opinion, the defendant was accorded a fair and impartial trial. We discover no error in any of the court’s rulings, calculated to injuriously affect his substantial rights. As stated, questions of fact for the consideration of the jury only were involved. The evidence was ample to support the verdict, and, as no reversible error appears, the judgment of conviction from which this appeal was taken will not be disturbed. The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

BRICKEN, P. J.

Appellant was indicted for murder in the first degree, the specific charge therein being that he unlawfully and with malice aforethought killed Eddie Rice, by shooting him with a pistol. Upon being tried, he was convicted for the offense of murder in the second degree, and the jury fixed his punishment at 15 years’ imprisonment. Judgment was duly entered and sentence pronounced in accordance with the verdict. He appealed to this court.

The evidence showed without dispute that appellant did kill the said Eddie Rice by shooting him with a pistol. He relied upon self-defense to justify him. The facts and circumstances attending the killing, as shown by the evidence, were-in sharp conflict, thus presenting questions for the determination of the jury. We have carefully examined the exceptions reserved to the court’s rulings upon the admission of evidence. These exceptions, and certain refused charges, present the only point of decision for our consideration, as no motion for a new trial was made. In our opinion, the defendant was accorded a fair and impartial trial. We discover no error in any of the court’s rulings, calculated to injuriously affect his substantial rights. As stated, questions of fact for the consideration of the jury only were involved. The evidence was ample to support the verdict, and, as no reversible error appears, the judgment of conviction from which this appeal was taken will not be disturbed. The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

121 So. 921, 23 Ala. App. 620, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dejarnette-v-state-alactapp-1929.