Hemphill v. State

101 So. 159, 20 Ala. App. 154, 1924 Ala. App. LEXIS 209
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided July 22, 1924·No. 7 Div. 971.·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

BRICKEN, P. J.

The evidence in this case, in the opinion of this court, is wholly insufficient to support the verdict of the jury and to sustain the judgment of conviction from which this appeal is taken. Under the rule announced in the case of Newt Wilson v. State (Ala. App.) 100 South. 914, 1 the state failed to meet the burden of proof resting upon it, and the evidence offered was not sufficient to overcome the presumption of innocence which under the law attended this defendant upon his trial.

The court erred in refusing the general affirmative charge requested. The judgment is therefore reversed, and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

1

Ante, p. 62.

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

Hemphill v. State, 101 So. 159, 20 Ala. App. 154, 1924 Ala. App. LEXIS 209 (Ala. Ct. App. 1924).

101 So. 159 (Hemphill v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Camp v. State
108 So. 79 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1926)
Cater v. State
105 So. 923 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1925)