Moore v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Moore v. State

152 So. 609, 26 Ala. App. 60, 1934 Ala. App. LEXIS 10

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 30, 1934

Docket8 Div. 900.

StatusPublished

This text of 152 So. 609 (Moore 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

Moore v. State, 152 So. 609, 26 Ala. App. 60, 1934 Ala. App. LEXIS 10 (Ala. Ct. App. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

SAMPORD, Judge.

The evidence in this ease, undisputed, is as follows:

The defendant was caught driving a car on which was a stolen and replaced tag. The car did not belong to defendant, and the defendant did not know, and had no knowledge of the fact, that the tag on the car was a replaced tag. The defendant was employed by the owner to drive the ear to Huntsville, which he did in ignorance of the fact that the tag on the car was not legally there.

The charge in this case carries with it the intent to do the act, and, without knowing the fact, there can be no criminal intent. 16 Corpus Juris, 85(53)b.

The rulings of-the court were not in accord with the above, and the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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