Harden v. State

109 Ala. 50
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided November 15, 1895·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

COLEMAN, J.

The defendant was convicted of gaming on Sunday. The defendant moved to arrest the judgment, upon the ground that the prosecution was commenced upon affidavit made and warrant issued by a justice of the peace, returnable to the Criminal Court of Pike county. The statutes authorize it, and,the question has been adjudicated.— Walker v. The State, 89 Ala. 74.

This court has no jurisdiction to review motions for new trials in criminal cases. If the defendant had requested the court m writing to give the affirmative charge and it had been refused, the refusal would have been error. The testimony in the record is insufficient to show the corpus, that there were probable grounds for believing the fact that the offense had been committed. A mere confession will not authorize a conviction, unless, independent of the confession, the evidence is sufficient to authorize the conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt [51]*51that the offense has been committed. In the condition of the record, the defendant must apply to the executive department for relief.

Affirmed.

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

Harden v. State, 109 Ala. 50 (Ala. 1895).

109 Ala. 50 (Harden v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bell v. State
103 So. 921 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1925)
Jackson v. State
93 So. 272 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1922)
Hill v. State
93 So. 460 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1922)
Braxton v. State
82 So. 657 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1919)
Patterson v. State
79 So. 459 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1918)
Ahlrichs v. Rollo
76 So. 37 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1917)
Johnson v. State
68 So. 687 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1915)
Calvert v. State
51 So. 311 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1910)