Waldrop v. State
110 So. 926, 21 Ala. App. 700
Opinion
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
Waldrop v. State, 110 So. 926, 21 Ala. App. 700 (Ala. Ct. App. 1926).
110 So. 926 (Waldrop v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.