Mathews v. State
This text of 107 So. 926 (Mathews 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.
Opinion
Defendant was convicted on a charge of possessing a still for the purpose of manufacturing whisky. It would serve no good purpose to enter into a detailed discussion of the evidence as disclosed by this record. The evidence for the state, if believed beyond a reasonable doubt, was sufficient upon which to base a verdict of conviction, and therefore the affirmative charge was properly refused. A review of the record discloses no error prejudicial to defendant’s rights. On the contrary, it shows that the defendant has had a fair and an impartial trial according to the forms of law, and the judgment is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
107 So. 926, 21 Ala. App. 685, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mathews-v-state-alactapp-1925.