Humes v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Humes v. State

116 So. 925, 22 Ala. App. 674

Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided March 27, 1928·No. 8 Div. 661.·Published

Opinion

BRICKEN, P. J.

The evidence in this ease is without conflict or dispute. This court is of the opinion that the state in this case failed to meet the burden of proof, and that the evidence, as a whole, was insufficient to overcome the presumption of innocence which attended the accused throughout the trial. Under this evidence he should have been discharged. For the error in refusing the affirmative charge, re *675 quested in'writing, the judgment of conviction is reversed and the cause remanded. Reversed and remanded.

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

BRICKEN, P. J.

The evidence in this ease is without conflict or dispute. This court is of the opinion that the state in this case failed to meet the burden of proof, and that the evidence, as a whole, was insufficient to overcome the presumption of innocence which attended the accused throughout the trial. Under this evidence he should have been discharged. For the error in refusing the affirmative charge, re *675 quested in'writing, the judgment of conviction is reversed and the cause remanded. Reversed and remanded.

Humes v. State, 116 So. 925, 22 Ala. App. 674 (Ala. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

116 So. 925 (Humes v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.