Trousdale v. State

142 So. 684, 25 Ala. App. 174, 1932 Ala. App. LEXIS 150
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided June 14, 1932·No. 8 Div. 556.·Published

Opinion

SAMFORD, J.

The defendant was indicted under section 3883 of the Code of 1923. The evidence tended to prove that the defendant was at or near a church in the Brick Community, while services were being held; that he was drunk and manifested a drunken condition by boisterous or indecent conduct or loud and profane discourse. The evidente was somewhat in conflict, but was sufficient to make a jury question.

What transpired at the Morrison home a short time before defendant went to the church was relevant as tending to prove the defendant’s condition-. • If he was drunk and rowdy at the Morrison home fifteen or twenty minutes before he went to the church, that facj; would tend to prove his condition at the church. . ■ •

- We find no error in the record, and the judgment is affirmed-.

Affirtífed.'

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

Trousdale v. State, 142 So. 684, 25 Ala. App. 174, 1932 Ala. App. LEXIS 150 (Ala. Ct. App. 1932).

142 So. 684 (Trousdale v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.