Hill v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Hill v. State

64 So. 163, 9 Ala. App. 7, 1913 Ala. App. LEXIS 252

Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided December 18, 1913·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

WALKER, P. -I.

Charges 1 and 8, refused to the defendant, were not. abstract, and each of them was such a charge as should have been given, Avhen duly requested by the defendant. — Heninburg v. State, 151 Ala. 26, 48 South. 959. The, action of the court on these and on other charges given and refused, as well as instructions given in the oral charge, make it plain that it entertained the view that, the voluntary drunkenness of the defendant, though it rendered him incapable of forming an intent or purpose to do anything, could not have the effect, of reducing a homicide committed by him below the grade of manslaughter in the first degree. That, this view is an erroneous one is shown by the ruling above cited.

Reversed and remanded.

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

WALKER, P. -I.

Charges 1 and 8, refused to the defendant, were not. abstract, and each of them was such a charge as should have been given, Avhen duly requested by the defendant. — Heninburg v. State, 151 Ala. 26, 48 South. 959. The, action of the court on these and on other charges given and refused, as well as instructions given in the oral charge, make it plain that it entertained the view that, the voluntary drunkenness of the defendant, though it rendered him incapable of forming an intent or purpose to do anything, could not have the effect, of reducing a homicide committed by him below the grade of manslaughter in the first degree. That, this view is an erroneous one is shown by the ruling above cited.

Reversed and remanded.

Hill v. State, 64 So. 163, 9 Ala. App. 7, 1913 Ala. App. LEXIS 252 (Ala. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

64 So. 163 (Hill v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related