Doss v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Doss v. State

61 So. 478, 7 Ala. App. 121, 1913 Ala. App. LEXIS 33

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 12, 1913

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 61 So. 478 (Doss 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

Doss v. State, 61 So. 478, 7 Ala. App. 121, 1913 Ala. App. LEXIS 33 (Ala. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

PELHAM, J.

The record in this case shows that the court allowed the solicitor extreme latitude in examining the only witness introduced to make out the state’s cáse in endeavoring to elicit from the witness that the sale of whisky, testified to as having been made by the defendant, was within the punishable period. This fact, essential to be'proven to support a conviction, was not shown by the, statement of the witness, as set out in the bill of exceptions; and the court was in error in refusing the general charge requested in writing by the defendant. — Yancey v. State, 1 Ala. App. 226, 55 South. 267; Molett v. State, 33 Ala. 408; Armistead v. State, 43 Ala. 340; Hurt v. State, 55 Ala. 214.

. For the error of the court in refusing the general charge, the judgment of conviction appealed from must be reversed.

Reversed and remanded.

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

PELHAM, J.

The record in this case shows that the court allowed the solicitor extreme latitude in examining the only witness introduced to make out the state’s cáse in endeavoring to elicit from the witness that the sale of whisky, testified to as having been made by the defendant, was within the punishable period. This fact, essential to be'proven to support a conviction, was not shown by the, statement of the witness, as set out in the bill of exceptions; and the court was in error in refusing the general charge requested in writing by the defendant. — Yancey v. State, 1 Ala. App. 226, 55 South. 267; Molett v. State, 33 Ala. 408; Armistead v. State, 43 Ala. 340; Hurt v. State, 55 Ala. 214.

. For the error of the court in refusing the general charge, the judgment of conviction appealed from must be reversed.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 So. 478, 7 Ala. App. 121, 1913 Ala. App. LEXIS 33, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doss-v-state-alactapp-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack