Speagle v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Speagle v. State

140 So. 883, 25 Ala. App. 57

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 12, 1932

Docket6 Div. 96.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 140 So. 883 (Speagle 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

Speagle v. State, 140 So. 883, 25 Ala. App. 57 (Ala. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

RICE, J.

Appellant, having taken the stand and testified in his own behalf, was asked, over his objection, by the state, on cross-examination, whether or not he was “in the liquor business.” He answered that he was not.

So, waiving any other consideration, his “answer” cured any error there might have been in permitting the question to be asked him. ’See Murray v. State, 17 Ala. App. 253, 84 So. 393.

The portion of the oral charge of the court, to which exception was reserved, seems to us to be true and correct. If it should be deemed by appellant abstract in his case, we are unable to see how it could have injured him legally.

We find nowhere prejudicial error, and the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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