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