McGee v. State

146 So. 628, 25 Ala. App. 361, 1933 Ala. App. LEXIS 44
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided March 7, 1933·No. 4 Div. 922.·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

RICE, Judge.

According to the undisputed testimony, ap-; pellant was apprehended by the officers while in the actual possession of a quantity of whisky.

We would not order a reversal of the judgment of conviction because of the admission of the testimony — also undisputed — that another receptacle than the one in the physical possession of appellant, likewise containing whisky, was found in close proximity, and accessible, to him.

All that occurred, and all that was found, on the single search made by the officers, in the single locality of appellant’s immediate presence, could well be considered- as the res gestse of the said search, etc.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

McGee v. State, 146 So. 628, 25 Ala. App. 361, 1933 Ala. App. LEXIS 44 (Ala. Ct. App. 1933).

146 So. 628 (McGee v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Edge v. State
54 So. 2d 312 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1951)
Womack v. State
41 So. 2d 429 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1949)