French v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

French v. State

135 So. 921, 24 Ala. App. 636

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 30, 1931

Docket8 Div. 301.

StatusPublished

This text of 135 So. 921 (French 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

French v. State, 135 So. 921, 24 Ala. App. 636 (Ala. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, P. J.

Appellant was charged by indictment with violating the prohibition law by having whisky in his possession. The evidence disclosed that the officers searched this appellant’s home on the morning in question and while the accused was present in his home. The search resulted in the finding of four gallons of whisky under a bed of the defendant in one of the rooms of his house. The accused offered no testimony, except his own, and, while testifying in his own behalf, he stated that one Lee Ramey brought the whisky to his house for Gus Moore. Neither Ramey nor Moore was examined. Appellant denied ownership of the whisky and testified he did not know it was in his home until the officers found it. These and other facts in evidence presented a jury question. No error appears,

Affirmed.

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

BRICKEN, P. J.

Appellant was charged by indictment with violating the prohibition law by having whisky in his possession. The evidence disclosed that the officers searched this appellant’s home on the morning in question and while the accused was present in his home. The search resulted in the finding of four gallons of whisky under a bed of the defendant in one of the rooms of his house. The accused offered no testimony, except his own, and, while testifying in his own behalf, he stated that one Lee Ramey brought the whisky to his house for Gus Moore. Neither Ramey nor Moore was examined. Appellant denied ownership of the whisky and testified he did not know it was in his home until the officers found it. These and other facts in evidence presented a jury question. No error appears,

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

135 So. 921, 24 Ala. App. 636, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/french-v-state-alactapp-1931.