Holladay v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Holladay v. State

108 So. 641, 21 Ala. App. 405, 1926 Ala. App. LEXIS 168

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 19, 1926

Docket6 Div. 635.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 108 So. 641 (Holladay 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

Holladay v. State, 108 So. 641, 21 Ala. App. 405, 1926 Ala. App. LEXIS 168 (Ala. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

SAMFOKD, J.

The party assaulted was a qualified member of the panel of jurors serving for the week of the court during which this defendant was tried. The point is made in various ways that the defendant’s ease should not be tried before the jurors impaneled with the prosecutor. All motions of defendant based upon that fact were overruled. There is nothing to show that defendant’s case was prejudiced by being tried before a jury selected from the jurors serving for the week. The matter of a continuance was within the sound discretion of the court, not to be revised on appeal except in eases of abuse. Riley v. State, 209 Ala. 505, 96 So. 599.

The excerpts from the court’s general charge to which exceptions were taken when considered with the entire charge are without error.

All of that testimony as to what took place at the time and place of the shooting *406 and relating to the difficulty was relevant as being a part of the res gestee. This applies to the drawing of the pistol by defendant from a place of concealment, the number of shots fired, and the direction in which the pistol was pointed when fired.

The defendant appears to have had a fair trial, free from errors, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

SAMFOKD, J.

The party assaulted was a qualified member of the panel of jurors serving for the week of the court during which this defendant was tried. The point is made in various ways that the defendant’s ease should not be tried before the jurors impaneled with the prosecutor. All motions of defendant based upon that fact were overruled. There is nothing to show that defendant’s case was prejudiced by being tried before a jury selected from the jurors serving for the week. The matter of a continuance was within the sound discretion of the court, not to be revised on appeal except in eases of abuse. Riley v. State, 209 Ala. 505, 96 So. 599.

The excerpts from the court’s general charge to which exceptions were taken when considered with the entire charge are without error.

All of that testimony as to what took place at the time and place of the shooting *406 and relating to the difficulty was relevant as being a part of the res gestee. This applies to the drawing of the pistol by defendant from a place of concealment, the number of shots fired, and the direction in which the pistol was pointed when fired.

The defendant appears to have had a fair trial, free from errors, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

108 So. 641, 21 Ala. App. 405, 1926 Ala. App. LEXIS 168, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holladay-v-state-alactapp-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack