Edmondson v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Edmondson v. State

7 So. 2d 508, 30 Ala. App. 433, 1942 Ala. App. LEXIS 68

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 3, 1942

Docket8 Div. 218.

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 7 So. 2d 508 (Edmondson 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

Edmondson v. State, 7 So. 2d 508, 30 Ala. App. 433, 1942 Ala. App. LEXIS 68 (Ala. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

SIMPSON, Judge.

Conviction of driving a motor vehicle while intoxicated. Code 1940, Title 36, Section 2.

This appeal is direct from the local county court, as provided in the Act, No. 647, Local Acts, 1939, Section 29, p. 375.

The evidence was in conflict, that for the State adequately supporting the charge, that for the defendant supporting his plea of not guilty.

Under such circumstances, it was within the exclusive province of the trial court, sitting without a jury, to weigh the evidence and ascertain the truth of the is *434 sue. 6 Alabama Digest, <®=>260(11); McCain v. State, Ala.App, 7 So.2d 320. 1 Having done so, and concluded against the defendant, and this court not being clearly convinced that to allow the conviction to stand would be manifestly wrong or unjust, the judgment of the trial court should not be disturbed. 7 Alabama Digest, Criminal Law, <®==>1159 (2).

The appeal is from the order denying the motion of the defendant for a new trial. There was no new evidence. .From aught appearing, the finding of the trial court was substantially supported. The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed. -

1

Ante, p. 424.

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

SIMPSON, Judge.

Conviction of driving a motor vehicle while intoxicated. Code 1940, Title 36, Section 2.

This appeal is direct from the local county court, as provided in the Act, No. 647, Local Acts, 1939, Section 29, p. 375.

The evidence was in conflict, that for the State adequately supporting the charge, that for the defendant supporting his plea of not guilty.

Under such circumstances, it was within the exclusive province of the trial court, sitting without a jury, to weigh the evidence and ascertain the truth of the is *434 sue. 6 Alabama Digest, <®=>260(11); McCain v. State, Ala.App, 7 So.2d 320. 1 Having done so, and concluded against the defendant, and this court not being clearly convinced that to allow the conviction to stand would be manifestly wrong or unjust, the judgment of the trial court should not be disturbed. 7 Alabama Digest, Criminal Law, <®==>1159 (2).

The appeal is from the order denying the motion of the defendant for a new trial. There was no new evidence. .From aught appearing, the finding of the trial court was substantially supported. The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed. -

1

Ante, p. 424.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 So. 2d 508, 30 Ala. App. 433, 1942 Ala. App. LEXIS 68, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edmondson-v-state-alactapp-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack