McKinnon v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

McKinnon v. State

137 So. 677, 24 Ala. App. 537, 1931 Ala. App. LEXIS 145

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 17, 1931

Docket4 Div. 839.

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 137 So. 677 (McKinnon 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

McKinnon v. State, 137 So. 677, 24 Ala. App. 537, 1931 Ala. App. LEXIS 145 (Ala. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, P. J.

The affidavit upon which this prosecution was predicated was authorized by section 4644 of the Code 1923. The motion to quash and the subsequent demurrers thereto were properly overruled by the court.

The evidence in this case, however, fails to meet the required rule, and in its worst phase creates merely a suspicion that the bottle of whisky found in a path near the defendant’s home belonged to him or was in his possession. There was no evidence tending to connect this appellant with the possession of the contraband liquor, the subject of this prosecution, and, in the absence of evidence to this effect, a conviction for the offense must of necessity rest on suspicion, surmise, or conjecture, and such evidence will not sustain a conviction. Under the whole evidence the accused was entitled to the general affirmative charge requested in writing and refused.

The error of the court in refusing the affirmative charge to defendant necessitates a reversal of the judgment of conviction from which this appeal was taken. It is so ordered.

Reversed and remanded.

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

BRICKEN, P. J.

The affidavit upon which this prosecution was predicated was authorized by section 4644 of the Code 1923. The motion to quash and the subsequent demurrers thereto were properly overruled by the court.

The evidence in this case, however, fails to meet the required rule, and in its worst phase creates merely a suspicion that the bottle of whisky found in a path near the defendant’s home belonged to him or was in his possession. There was no evidence tending to connect this appellant with the possession of the contraband liquor, the subject of this prosecution, and, in the absence of evidence to this effect, a conviction for the offense must of necessity rest on suspicion, surmise, or conjecture, and such evidence will not sustain a conviction. Under the whole evidence the accused was entitled to the general affirmative charge requested in writing and refused.

The error of the court in refusing the affirmative charge to defendant necessitates a reversal of the judgment of conviction from which this appeal was taken. It is so ordered.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 So. 677, 24 Ala. App. 537, 1931 Ala. App. LEXIS 145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mckinnon-v-state-alactapp-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack