Diggs v. State

101 So. 357, 20 Ala. App. 213, 1924 Ala. App. LEXIS 242
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided August 19, 1924·No. 4 Div. 912.·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

SAMFORD, J.

The indictment was in Code form and charged a burglary of a dwelling, or shop, store, warehouse, or other building of E. H. Baker, in which goods, merchandise, or clothing, things of value, were kept for sale, use, or deposit. The evidence for the state was that defendant broke and entered a storehouse of B. H. Baker, but there was no evidence that “things of value, were kept for sale, use, or deposit.” The .judgment in this case is reversed, on authority of Gilmore v. State, 99 Ala. 154, 13 South. 536; Porter v. State, 17 Ala. App. 550, 86 South. 143; Ashmon v. State, 9 Ala. App. 29, 63 South. 754.

Tlie judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Diggs v. State, 101 So. 357, 20 Ala. App. 213, 1924 Ala. App. LEXIS 242 (Ala. Ct. App. 1924).

101 So. 357 (Diggs v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anderson v. State
389 So. 2d 180 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1980)
Spears v. State
316 So. 2d 704 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1975)
Miller v. State
189 So. 2d 576 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1966)
Harmon v. State
108 So. 643 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1926)