Huston v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Huston v. State

109 So. 384, 21 Ala. App. 472, 1926 Ala. App. LEXIS 227

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 29, 1926

Docket7 Div. 231.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 109 So. 384 (Huston 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

Huston v. State, 109 So. 384, 21 Ala. App. 472, 1926 Ala. App. LEXIS 227 (Ala. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, P. J.

Appellant was convicted of the offense of violating the Prohibition Law by having whisky in his possession.

The evidence disclosed that the two state witnesses who were police officers of the city of Talladega, were “riding around” on the night in question and discovered several parties trying to pull an automobile out of a ditch. They discovered this appellant in the car, and the evidence without dispute showed that he was drunk and that he had a quart jar nearly full of whisky in his bosom. The defendant testified in his own behalf and admitted he was drunk upon the occasion testified to by the state witnesses, and stated further that if he had any whisky in his bosom he did not know anything about it, etc. Under no phase of the evidence in this ease was the defendant entitled to the affirmative charge. . Its .refusal was without error.

On cross-examination of defendant he admitted that he got drunk about 6 or 7 o’clock; that he went from his home to Shoe-co and “drank a right smart at Shocco”; and that the whisky he drank there was not his but belonged to a friend of his. Thereupon the solicitor propounded the following question: “Q. Who was your friend?” And upon being required to answer over his objection and exception, he replied: “I don’t remember who my friend was.” This is the only ruling invoked by the court upon the testimony. I.t is so clearly free from error no discussion of tjie point is necessary.

*473 We find no error upon the trial of this ease, and the judgment of .conviction appealed from will stand affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

BRICKEN, P. J.

Appellant was convicted of the offense of violating the Prohibition Law by having whisky in his possession.

The evidence disclosed that the two state witnesses who were police officers of the city of Talladega, were “riding around” on the night in question and discovered several parties trying to pull an automobile out of a ditch. They discovered this appellant in the car, and the evidence without dispute showed that he was drunk and that he had a quart jar nearly full of whisky in his bosom. The defendant testified in his own behalf and admitted he was drunk upon the occasion testified to by the state witnesses, and stated further that if he had any whisky in his bosom he did not know anything about it, etc. Under no phase of the evidence in this ease was the defendant entitled to the affirmative charge. . Its .refusal was without error.

On cross-examination of defendant he admitted that he got drunk about 6 or 7 o’clock; that he went from his home to Shoe-co and “drank a right smart at Shocco”; and that the whisky he drank there was not his but belonged to a friend of his. Thereupon the solicitor propounded the following question: “Q. Who was your friend?” And upon being required to answer over his objection and exception, he replied: “I don’t remember who my friend was.” This is the only ruling invoked by the court upon the testimony. I.t is so clearly free from error no discussion of tjie point is necessary.

*473 We find no error upon the trial of this ease, and the judgment of .conviction appealed from will stand affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 So. 384, 21 Ala. App. 472, 1926 Ala. App. LEXIS 227, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/huston-v-state-alactapp-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack