Hankins v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Hankins v. State

74 So. 400, 15 Ala. App. 581, 1917 Ala. App. LEXIS 45

DecidedFebruary 6, 1917

StatusPublished

This text of 74 So. 400 (Hankins 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

Hankins v. State, 74 So. 400, 15 Ala. App. 581, 1917 Ala. App. LEXIS 45 (Ala. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, J.

The defendant was indicted for the violation of the prohibition law, in that he sold, offered for sale, kept for sale, or otherwise disposed of, spirituous, vinous, or malt liquors, contrary to law, etc. To this indictment the defendant interposed a plea of not guilty; but after the state had introduced its evidence and had made out its case as required by law, the defendant obtained permission of the court to withdraw his plea of not guilty, and thereupon entered a plea of guilty as charged in the indictment.

The only assignment of error disclosed by the record is the court’s refusal to give at request of the defendant, the following written charge:

“Gentlemen of the jury, it is a principle of law that justice should be tempered in mercy.”

There was no error in refusing this charge, as it embodies no proposition of law and is argumentative, and the court was under no duty to give it.

Finding no error, the judgment of the trial court must be affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

BRICKEN, J.

The defendant was indicted for the violation of the prohibition law, in that he sold, offered for sale, kept for sale, or otherwise disposed of, spirituous, vinous, or malt liquors, contrary to law, etc. To this indictment the defendant interposed a plea of not guilty; but after the state had introduced its evidence and had made out its case as required by law, the defendant obtained permission of the court to withdraw his plea of not guilty, and thereupon entered a plea of guilty as charged in the indictment.

The only assignment of error disclosed by the record is the court’s refusal to give at request of the defendant, the following written charge:

“Gentlemen of the jury, it is a principle of law that justice should be tempered in mercy.”

There was no error in refusing this charge, as it embodies no proposition of law and is argumentative, and the court was under no duty to give it.

Finding no error, the judgment of the trial court must be affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

74 So. 400, 15 Ala. App. 581, 1917 Ala. App. LEXIS 45, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hankins-v-state-alactapp-1917.