Little v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Little v. State

75 So. 694, 16 Ala. App. 181, 1917 Ala. App. LEXIS 236

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 8, 1917

Docket8 Div. 488.

StatusPublished

This text of 75 So. 694 (Little 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

Little v. State, 75 So. 694, 16 Ala. App. 181, 1917 Ala. App. LEXIS 236 (Ala. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

BROWN, P. J.

The evidence offered by the state tended to show that within the time covered by the complaint the witness Guthrie went to defendant’s house in Jackson county, and defendant was out in the yard; that witness told defendant that he had come to get some whisky; that the defendant said, “All right;” that a few minutes later witness went into the house and placed a 25 cent piece on the mantel and walked back toward the door, and then turned and walked hack to the mantle and found a pint of whisky, and picked it up and carried it away; that Guthrie left the defendant in the yard, but did not know whether he remained in the yard during the time he was in the house or not.

The defendant denied having any connection with the matters testified to by Guthrie and that such transaction ever took place. The case was tried by the court without a jury, and there was evidence authorizing a judgment of conviction, if believed. Mulligan v. State, 15 Ala. App. 204, 72 South. 761.

We find no reversible error in the record.

Affirmed.

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

BROWN, P. J.

The evidence offered by the state tended to show that within the time covered by the complaint the witness Guthrie went to defendant’s house in Jackson county, and defendant was out in the yard; that witness told defendant that he had come to get some whisky; that the defendant said, “All right;” that a few minutes later witness went into the house and placed a 25 cent piece on the mantel and walked back toward the door, and then turned and walked hack to the mantle and found a pint of whisky, and picked it up and carried it away; that Guthrie left the defendant in the yard, but did not know whether he remained in the yard during the time he was in the house or not.

The defendant denied having any connection with the matters testified to by Guthrie and that such transaction ever took place. The case was tried by the court without a jury, and there was evidence authorizing a judgment of conviction, if believed. Mulligan v. State, 15 Ala. App. 204, 72 South. 761.

We find no reversible error in the record.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

75 So. 694, 16 Ala. App. 181, 1917 Ala. App. LEXIS 236, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/little-v-state-alactapp-1917.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack