Malone v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Malone v. State

106 So. 921, 21 Ala. App. 684

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 24, 1925

Docket1 Div. 637.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 106 So. 921 (Malone 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

Malone v. State, 106 So. 921, 21 Ala. App. 684 (Ala. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

BICE, J.

The appellant was convicted of the offense of unlawfully having in his possession a still, etc- There was ample evidence to support the verdict returned. Walker v. State, 19 Ala. App. 20, 95 So. 205; Gilbert v. State, 19 Ala. App. 104, 95 So. 502; White v. State, 18 Ala. App. 275, 91 So. 888; Layman v. State, 18 Ala. App. 441, 93 So. 66; Williams v. State, 18 Ala. App. 286, 92 So. 28; Johnson v. State, 18 Ala. App. 72, 88 So. 353. We have examined each of the few exceptions reserved upon the admission or rejection of testimony, and find no merit in any of them. The rulings in each case involved only elementary principles of law, which have been many times discussed by this court. The defendant appears to-have had a fair trial, and, no prejudicial error any-where appearing, the judgment will be affirmed. Affirmed.

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

BICE, J.

The appellant was convicted of the offense of unlawfully having in his possession a still, etc- There was ample evidence to support the verdict returned. Walker v. State, 19 Ala. App. 20, 95 So. 205; Gilbert v. State, 19 Ala. App. 104, 95 So. 502; White v. State, 18 Ala. App. 275, 91 So. 888; Layman v. State, 18 Ala. App. 441, 93 So. 66; Williams v. State, 18 Ala. App. 286, 92 So. 28; Johnson v. State, 18 Ala. App. 72, 88 So. 353. We have examined each of the few exceptions reserved upon the admission or rejection of testimony, and find no merit in any of them. The rulings in each case involved only elementary principles of law, which have been many times discussed by this court. The defendant appears to-have had a fair trial, and, no prejudicial error any-where appearing, the judgment will be affirmed. Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

106 So. 921, 21 Ala. App. 684, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/malone-v-state-alactapp-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack