Malone v. State

106 So. 921, 21 Ala. App. 684
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided November 24, 1925·No. 1 Div. 637.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

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

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

106 So. 921 (Malone v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Malone v. State
106 So. 912 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1926)