Griffin v. State

129 Ala. 92
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided November 15, 1900·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

SHARPE, J.

Where a written instrument is only a collateral incident to the matter in issue, and its existence rather than its contents is the matter desired to be proved, the rule which in general -requires the production of the writing as the best evidence of its contents is not applicable.—1 Green. on Ev., § 89; Allen v. State, 79 Ala. 34. Of this class were the writs in attachment and detinue mentioned in testimony adduced by the State. Here the question was not of the authority of the officer, for the defendant was not charged with unlawfully resisting such authority. It was merely whether the defendant was guilty of an assault with intent to murder, an offense involving-malice and vicious acts on which those writs had no direct connection or bearing.

There is no error in the record.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Griffin v. State, 129 Ala. 92 (Ala. 1900).

129 Ala. 92 (Griffin v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Knight v. State
276 So. 2d 624 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1973)
Hall v. State
109 So. 847 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1926)
Roberson v. State
106 So. 696 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1925)
Hancock v. State
105 So. 401 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1925)
Wright v. State
72 So. 564 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1916)
Gulf Compress Co. v. Jones Cotton Co.
55 So. 206 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1911)
Williams v. State
43 So. 720 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1907)