Harris v. State
140 So. 925, 25 Ala. App. 636
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Harris v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 24 Ala. App. 59 →
Opinion
Defendants were convicted of manufacturing whisky. The sole question presented by this record is the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction. We have read the record and find the evidence sufficient. The affirmative charge was properly refused.
The judgment is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Harris v. State, 140 So. 925, 25 Ala. App. 636 (Ala. Ct. App. 1932).
140 So. 925 (Harris v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.