Grimes v. City Commissioners of Florence

Alabama Court of Appeals

Grimes v. City Commissioners of Florence

172 So. 357, 27 Ala. App. 362, 1937 Ala. App. LEXIS 13

Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided February 2, 1937·No. 8 Div. 497.·Published

Opinion

SAMFORD, Judge.

Defendant was convicted of a violation of a city ordinance, and from that judgment she appeals.

This record has been read by'the court sitting en banc, and we have reached the conclusion that the evidence for the city does not sufficiently connect the defendant with the possession of the whisky, found on premises not under the control of the defendant, in such sort as to authorize a conviction.

At the conclusion of the city’s evidence, the defendant moved to exclude such evidence, and this motion should have been granted. For the error in refusing to exclude the city’s evidence, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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

SAMFORD, Judge.

Defendant was convicted of a violation of a city ordinance, and from that judgment she appeals.

This record has been read by'the court sitting en banc, and we have reached the conclusion that the evidence for the city does not sufficiently connect the defendant with the possession of the whisky, found on premises not under the control of the defendant, in such sort as to authorize a conviction.

At the conclusion of the city’s evidence, the defendant moved to exclude such evidence, and this motion should have been granted. For the error in refusing to exclude the city’s evidence, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

Grimes v. City Commissioners of Florence, 172 So. 357, 27 Ala. App. 362, 1937 Ala. App. LEXIS 13 (Ala. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

172 So. 357 (Grimes v. City Commissioners of Florence) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.