McKenzie v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

McKenzie v. State

158 So. 773, 26 Ala. App. 295, 1935 Ala. App. LEXIS 30

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 15, 1935

Docket4 Div. 77.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 158 So. 773 (McKenzie 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

McKenzie v. State, 158 So. 773, 26 Ala. App. 295, 1935 Ala. App. LEXIS 30 (Ala. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

RICE, Judge.

The state’s witnesses were but two, the sheriff of the county and his deputy. It was entirely a matter of discretion with the court —of which we discover no abuse — that it allowed the sheriff to remain in the courtroom while the deputy testified, and this though the defendant’s (appellant’s) witnesses were, at the request of the solicitor, put “under the rule.” Brannon v. State, 16 Ala. App. 259, 76 So. 991, certiorari denied Id., 201 Ala. 695, 77 So. 999.

The few exceptions reserved on the taking of testimony have each been critically examined by us. In no instance does the ruling underlying same appear to call for discussion. There was patently no prejudicial error in any such ruling.

There was no exception to any part of the court’s oral charge, and no refused written charges. The evidence amply supported the verdict.

We discover nowhere error of a prejudicial nature, and the judgment of conviction must be, and is, affirmed.

Affirmed.

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