Harwell v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Harwell v. State

85 So. 831, 17 Ala. App. 396, 1920 Ala. App. LEXIS 68

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 6, 1920

Docket8 Div. 657.

StatusPublished

This text of 85 So. 831 (Harwell 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

Harwell v. State, 85 So. 831, 17 Ala. App. 396, 1920 Ala. App. LEXIS 68 (Ala. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

SAMFORD, J.

[1] The case was tried by the court without the intervention of a jury. There was ample evidence to warrant the finding as determined by the court. Where this is the case, the judgment will not be disturbed. Maisel v. State, ante, p. 12, 81 South. 348.

[2] The questions presented by exceptions to the evidence are elementary. Evidence having been introduced tending to prove that the crime of adultery had been committed, and it being shown that admissions of the defendant were voluntary, such admissions were properly admitted.

[3] The .court did not err in refusing'to allow the witness Ruby Harwell to testify that she did not see any improper conduct between defendant and Erie Poses’-. This involved her opinion as to what constituted improper conduct.

There is no error in the record, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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