Sharp v. State

112 So. 460, 22 Ala. App. 81, 1927 Ala. App. LEXIS 48
CourtAlabama Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 19, 1927
Docket8 Div. 516.
StatusPublished

This text of 112 So. 460 (Sharp 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
Sharp v. State, 112 So. 460, 22 Ala. App. 81, 1927 Ala. App. LEXIS 48 (Ala. Ct. App. 1927).

Opinion

SAMFORD, J.

The mere presence of a person at a still where whisky is being manufactured is not sufficient upon which to predicate a conviction. But, where the presence is shown, and the person does any act, or speaks any word, indicating ownership, possession, joint or several, or from which a legal inference could be drawn that defendant was aiding or abetting in the possession of the still or the manufacture of the whisky then being made, the question of guilt is properly submitted to the jury. Elmore v. State, 21 Ala. App. 410, 109 So. 114.

There is 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

Related

Elmore v. State
109 So. 114 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1926)
Elmore v. State
109 So. 114 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1926)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
112 So. 460, 22 Ala. App. 81, 1927 Ala. App. LEXIS 48, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sharp-v-state-alactapp-1927.