Hubbard v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Hubbard v. State

102 So. 915, 20 Ala. App. 473, 1925 Ala. App. LEXIS 27

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 3, 1925

Docket2 Div. 309.

StatusPublished

This text of 102 So. 915 (Hubbard 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

Hubbard v. State, 102 So. 915, 20 Ala. App. 473, 1925 Ala. App. LEXIS 27 (Ala. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, P. J.

The second count of the indictment, under which the defendant was convicted, charged him, in proper form and substance, with the offense of unlawfully possessing a still to be used for the purpose "of manufacturing prohibited liquors ■contrary to law.

The evidence of the state was in our. opinion sufficient to make out a prima facie case against this appellant, and met the rule laid ■down in Wilson v. State (Ala. App.) 100 So. 914. 1 It would serve no good purpose to here recite the facts adduced upon this trial. The ■defendant offered testimony in explanation ;of his presence at the still, and also as to 'the keg, tools, etc., which he carried there at the time of his arrest. He also contradicted the state’s witnesses in several instances -as to what occurred, and these conflicts in the evidence, together with other facts adduced upon the trial, clearly presented a jury question. This being true, the court properly refused to the defendant charges 1 and 2, which charges sought to have the ■court direct a verdict in his behalf.

The exceptions reserved to the court’s rulings upon the admission of testimony are .■so clearly without merit they need no discussion. As stated, the evidence in this case presented a question for the determination of the jury, and was ample to support the verdict and to sustain the judgment appealed from.

The record also is free from error, therefore the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

1

Ante, p. 62.

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

BRICKEN, P. J.

The second count of the indictment, under which the defendant was convicted, charged him, in proper form and substance, with the offense of unlawfully possessing a still to be used for the purpose "of manufacturing prohibited liquors ■contrary to law.

The evidence of the state was in our. opinion sufficient to make out a prima facie case against this appellant, and met the rule laid ■down in Wilson v. State (Ala. App.) 100 So. 914. 1 It would serve no good purpose to here recite the facts adduced upon this trial. The ■defendant offered testimony in explanation ;of his presence at the still, and also as to 'the keg, tools, etc., which he carried there at the time of his arrest. He also contradicted the state’s witnesses in several instances -as to what occurred, and these conflicts in the evidence, together with other facts adduced upon the trial, clearly presented a jury question. This being true, the court properly refused to the defendant charges 1 and 2, which charges sought to have the ■court direct a verdict in his behalf.

The exceptions reserved to the court’s rulings upon the admission of testimony are .■so clearly without merit they need no discussion. As stated, the evidence in this case presented a question for the determination of the jury, and was ample to support the verdict and to sustain the judgment appealed from.

The record also is free from error, therefore the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

1

Ante, p. 62.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

102 So. 915, 20 Ala. App. 473, 1925 Ala. App. LEXIS 27, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hubbard-v-state-alactapp-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack