Sims v. State

99 Ala. 161
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided November 15, 1892·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

HARALSON, J.-

The question of the intent with wJiich the defendant took and carried away the yearling, wa$;not free from doubt, and was one of inference from the evidence, proper to be determined by the jury. There were conflicts in the evidence, — some tending to establish the case for the State,- — -and different inferences, as to the intent of the defendant in taking the animal, may be reasonably drawn from it. In such a case, the general charge in favor of the defendant, was properly refused.—Johnson v. The State, 73 Ala. 523; Bromley v. Birmingham Min. R. R. Co., 95 Ala. 397; 11 So. Eep. 341.

Affirmed.

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

Sims v. State, 99 Ala. 161 (Ala. 1892).

99 Ala. 161 (Sims v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Nolly v. State
43 So. 2d 841 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1950)
Autry v. State
38 So. 2d 348 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1949)
Bowman v. State
27 So. 2d 511 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1946)
Reed v. State
27 So. 2d 22 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1945)
Couch v. State
20 So. 2d 57 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1944)
Pumphrey v. State
47 So. 156 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1908)
Frost v. State
124 Ala. 85 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1899)
Bonner v. State
125 Ala. 49 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1899)
Dudley v. State
121 Ala. 4 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1898)