Russ v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Russ v. State

103 So. 926, 20 Ala. App. 694

Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided February 17, 1925·No. 3 Div. 477.·Published

Opinion

SAMPORD, J.

There was sufficient evidence to submit this case to the jury, but no evidence as to venue. The affirmative charge was asked for defendant, but the fact that it was asked on account of a failure of proof as to venue was not brought to the attention of the trial court. This is not now an. open question in Alabama. Ray v. State, 16 Ala. App. 496, 79 So. 620; Watts v. State, 204 Ala. 372, 86 So. 70; Fondren v. State, 204 Ala. 451, 86 So. 71; Reaves v. State, 18 Ala. App. 5, 87 So. 705. We find no error in the record, and the judgment is affirmed. Affirmed.

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

SAMPORD, J.

There was sufficient evidence to submit this case to the jury, but no evidence as to venue. The affirmative charge was asked for defendant, but the fact that it was asked on account of a failure of proof as to venue was not brought to the attention of the trial court. This is not now an. open question in Alabama. Ray v. State, 16 Ala. App. 496, 79 So. 620; Watts v. State, 204 Ala. 372, 86 So. 70; Fondren v. State, 204 Ala. 451, 86 So. 71; Reaves v. State, 18 Ala. App. 5, 87 So. 705. We find no error in the record, and the judgment is affirmed. Affirmed.

Russ v. State, 103 So. 926, 20 Ala. App. 694 (Ala. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

103 So. 926 (Russ v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related