Flournoy v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Flournoy v. State

106 So. 392, 21 Ala. App. 182, 1925 Ala. App. LEXIS 310

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 24, 1925

Docket4 Div. 168.

StatusPublished

This text of 106 So. 392 (Flournoy 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

Flournoy v. State, 106 So. 392, 21 Ala. App. 182, 1925 Ala. App. LEXIS 310 (Ala. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

*183 RICE, J.

The appellant was convicted of the offense of assault with intent to murder upon one Ike Griffin.

As stated by his counsel in their brief filed on this appeal, there is only one question by exception reserved for our decision.

The witness Henry Stewart was allowed to testify, over defendant’s objection, that about one hour before the difficulty, and about one mile away from its scene, he (Stewart) heard defendant say “he was going to shoot the s-- of a b-, that he was trying to impose on him,” not naming the party later assaulted. This testimony we think admissible under the ruling in Moulton v. State, 19 Ala. App. 446, 98 So. 709, and the authorities therein cited.

We find no prejudicial error, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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