Farmer v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Farmer v. State

99 So. 59, 19 Ala. App. 560, 1924 Ala. App. LEXIS 28

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 5, 1924

Docket7 Div. 974.

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 99 So. 59 (Farmer 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

Farmer v. State, 99 So. 59, 19 Ala. App. 560, 1924 Ala. App. LEXIS 28 (Ala. Ct. App. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

SAMFORD, J.

The defendant was convicted under an indictment which in two counts charged the manufacture of whisky and possessing a still, and from the judgment he appeals.

Thei’e was no evidence to connect the defendant either with the manufacture of whisky or the possession of a still, other than his mere presence at a still located on lands not in his possession. It has many times been held by this court that this is not sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction. The defendant was entitled to the general affirmative charge. Moon v. State (Ala. App.) 95 South. 830; 1 Guin v. State, ante, p. 67, 94 South. 788; Morris v. State, 18 Ala. App. 456, 93 South. 61.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded. , ,

Reversed and remanded.

1

Ante, p. 176.

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