McCormick v. State
111 So. 647, 21 Ala. App. 654, 1927 Ala. App. LEXIS 228
Opinion
We can find no fault with the portions of the trial court’s oral charge made the basis of exceptions by appellant. The court did no more than tell the jury that defendant’s (appellant’s) testimony should be considered in the light of all the other testimony in the case, and this was permissible.
The other exceptions reserved have each been examined, and in none of the rulings complained of do we find prejudicial error. The case seems to have been fairly tried, and the judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
McCormick v. State, 111 So. 647, 21 Ala. App. 654, 1927 Ala. App. LEXIS 228 (Ala. Ct. App. 1927).
111 So. 647 (McCormick v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
McCormick v. State
112 So. 918 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1927)