Smith v. State

75 So. 192, 16 Ala. App. 47, 1917 Ala. App. LEXIS 117
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided April 10, 1917·No. 2 Div. 144.·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinions

Hain was asked the following question, to which objection was sustained, *Page 49 said question referring to Riley B. Stone, the dead man:

"First, was he the kind of man that if he made a threat to take your life, you would treat it as not amounting to anything or that he meant business?" "Second, would you consider him a man of good character who threatened to take the life of the owner of a piece of land if he came on it?"

The following charges were refused to defendant:

(9) It is your duty to consider the testimony of defendant, as much as it is your duty to consider the evidence of any other witness in the case, and if the testimony of defendant raises in your mind a reasonable doubt of his guilt, then you should not convict him but should acquit.

(2) The probability of a thing being true means that there is more evidence in favor of its being true than there is evidence in favor of its being the opposite of true.

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

Smith v. State, 75 So. 192, 16 Ala. App. 47, 1917 Ala. App. LEXIS 117 (Ala. Ct. App. 1917).

75 So. 192 (Smith v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Nicholson v. State
337 So. 2d 152 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1976)
Mitchell v. State
89 So. 2d 238 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1956)
Garrett v. State
31 So. 2d 151 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1947)
Marshall v. State
121 So. 72 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1929)
Shumate v. State
97 So. 772 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1923)
Ex Parte Smith
76 So. 997 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1917)