State v. Young

139 Ala. 136
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided November 15, 1903·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

DOWDELL, J. —

The defendant was arrested on a warrant issued by a justice of the peace on affidavit charging him with arson, and upon preliminary hearing was by a justice of the peace committed to jail. Upon his application to the judge of the city court of Selma, he was discharged by the judge of said city court on writ of habeas corpus. Prom the judgment discharging the defendant, the State prosecutes an apepal.

The undisputed evidence was that the defendant was in the possession and actual occupancy under a lease of the house alleged to have been burned by him. Arson at common Jaw as well as under the statute is an offense against the possession rather than the property. — Heard v. The State, 81 Ala. 55; Adams v. The State, 62 Ala. 177. The defendant was, in a sense, during the term of the lease and while in the possession and occupancy of the [137] bouse, the owner. Under tbe above authorities, and the ca.se of Sullivan v. State, 5 Stew. & Porter, 178, the judge of the city court properly discharged the defendant, and the judgment will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

State v. Young, 139 Ala. 136 (Ala. 1903).

139 Ala. 136 (State v. Young) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Stafford v. State
31 So. 2d 146 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1947)
Sawyer v. State
132 So. 188 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1931)
Williams v. State
132 So. 136 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1930)
State v. Blumenthal
203 S.W. 36 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1918)
Williams v. State
58 So. 925 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1912)
Peinhardt v. State
49 So. 831 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1909)