Waldrop v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Waldrop v. State

110 So. 926, 21 Ala. App. 700

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 23, 1926

Docket5 Div. 638.

StatusPublished

This text of 110 So. 926 (Waldrop 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

Waldrop v. State, 110 So. 926, 21 Ala. App. 700 (Ala. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, P. J.

The accusation against this defendant was a violation of the prohibition law. He was convicted by the jury, and was duly sentenced to perform hard labor for the county, and appealed. There was a conflict in the evidence, and the jury decided adversely to defendant. In so doing they were amply justified by the evidence. The exceptions reserved to the court’s rulings upon the admission of evidence are so clearly without merit they need not be discussed. The judgment is afiirmed. Affirmed. ,

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

BRICKEN, P. J.

The accusation against this defendant was a violation of the prohibition law. He was convicted by the jury, and was duly sentenced to perform hard labor for the county, and appealed. There was a conflict in the evidence, and the jury decided adversely to defendant. In so doing they were amply justified by the evidence. The exceptions reserved to the court’s rulings upon the admission of evidence are so clearly without merit they need not be discussed. The judgment is afiirmed. Affirmed. ,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

110 So. 926, 21 Ala. App. 700, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/waldrop-v-state-alactapp-1926.