Taylor v. State

99 So. 733, 19 Ala. App. 600, 1924 Ala. App. LEXIS 63
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided February 12, 1924·No. 7 Div. 933. [fn*]·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

SAMFORD, J.

The indictment contained two counts, one charging larceny and the other receiving stolen goods. The verdict of the jury is predicated on the second count. Whatever was taken at the time of the larceny is of the res gestse and is relevant to the issue.

A witness, if he knew, can testify as to the identity of a suit of clothes without giving any parii-ular identifying description. The probative íorce of sucb testimony is for the jury.

We have examined the entire record. There are no prejudicial errors, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Taylor v. State, 99 So. 733, 19 Ala. App. 600, 1924 Ala. App. LEXIS 63 (Ala. Ct. App. 1924).

99 So. 733 (Taylor v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cole v. State
352 So. 2d 17 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1977)