Holt v. City of Mobile

Alabama Court of Appeals

Holt v. City of Mobile

80 So. 171, 16 Ala. App. 597, 1918 Ala. App. LEXIS 272

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 26, 1918

Docket1 Div. 258.

StatusPublished

This text of 80 So. 171 (Holt v. City of Mobile) 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

Holt v. City of Mobile, 80 So. 171, 16 Ala. App. 597, 1918 Ala. App. LEXIS 272 (Ala. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

BROWN, P. J.

The only question presented on the record is whether or not the evidence is sufficient to authorize the judgment of conviction. There was some evidence tending to show that the defendant was in charge of the place where the officers found liquor stored, and in a building that was not used exclusively for a dwelling, Jones v. Montgomery, ante, p. 357, 77 South. 969; Conner v. State, ante, p. 452, 78 South. 715; Holt v. State, ante, p. 399, 78 South. 315.

The testimony was given ore tenus before the court, sitting without a jury, and we are unable to say from the evidence in the record that the conclusion of the trial court is plainly and palpably contrary to the great weight of the evidence. Union Mut. Aid Ass’n of Mobile v. Carroway, 201 Ala. 414, 78 South. 732; Smith v. Thomas, 201 Ala. 442, 78 South. 820; Mulligan v. State, 15 Ala. App. 204, 72 South. 761.

Affirmed.

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

BROWN, P. J.

The only question presented on the record is whether or not the evidence is sufficient to authorize the judgment of conviction. There was some evidence tending to show that the defendant was in charge of the place where the officers found liquor stored, and in a building that was not used exclusively for a dwelling, Jones v. Montgomery, ante, p. 357, 77 South. 969; Conner v. State, ante, p. 452, 78 South. 715; Holt v. State, ante, p. 399, 78 South. 315.

The testimony was given ore tenus before the court, sitting without a jury, and we are unable to say from the evidence in the record that the conclusion of the trial court is plainly and palpably contrary to the great weight of the evidence. Union Mut. Aid Ass’n of Mobile v. Carroway, 201 Ala. 414, 78 South. 732; Smith v. Thomas, 201 Ala. 442, 78 South. 820; Mulligan v. State, 15 Ala. App. 204, 72 South. 761.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 So. 171, 16 Ala. App. 597, 1918 Ala. App. LEXIS 272, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holt-v-city-of-mobile-alactapp-1918.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack