Goodman v. State

99 So. 61, 19 Ala. App. 556, 1924 Ala. App. LEXIS 23
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided February 2, 1924·No. 7 Div. 2.·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

SAMFORD, J.

The evidence in this case was in direct conflict, that for the state making a positive case for the state, and that for the defendant denying the statements made by the state’s witnesses. The question was one for the jury, and we are not authorized to disturb the verdict.

While the question asked by the solicitor, to which objection was made, was leading, its allowance was in the discretion of the trial judge.

Refused charge 4 is bad, for that it singles out a portion of the evidence, .upon which an acquittal is demanded. 1 Mayf. Dig. p. 170, par. 13.

We find no error in the record, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Goodman v. State, 99 So. 61, 19 Ala. App. 556, 1924 Ala. App. LEXIS 23 (Ala. Ct. App. 1924).

99 So. 61 (Goodman v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Zorn v. State
102 So. 722 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1924)
Hewitt v. State
102 So. 489 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1924)