Watson v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Watson v. State

94 So. 787, 19 Ala. App. 59, 1922 Ala. App. LEXIS 35

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 19, 1922

Docket5 Div. 423

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 94 So. 787 (Watson 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

Watson v. State, 94 So. 787, 19 Ala. App. 59, 1922 Ala. App. LEXIS 35 (Ala. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

SAMEORD, J.

The homicide was the culmination of an altercation beginning in Ellington’s store in Goldhill, Ala. The par-, ties were first heard cursing each other in Ellington’s store; defendant drew his pistol; they both came out of the store; Bullard, the deceased, went off and in a few minutes returned with a pistol; Watson went to the store of Woody about 30 or 35 yards away, Bullard and his brother following him, when further words wer.e passed. Watson went out of the Woody store, the two Bullards going to the porch of the store; Watson dared them to get on the ground; the Bul-lards got on the ground; Watson fired, killing one of the Bullards, the whole time from the first words passing between the parties in Ellington’s store to the shooting, being variously estimated at from 5 to 15 minutes, and the entire distance covered being about 35 yards. The whole was one transaction. Page v. State, 17 Ala. App. 70, 81 South. 848. The foregoing disposes of the exceptions reserved to the admissibility of the evidence and to the refusal of the court to give charge D.

Erom the evidence in this case it was-a question for the jury to say whether the two Bullards pursued defendant from Ellington’s store to Woody’s store, and therefore charge B was properly refused.

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

Affirmed.

MERRITT, J., not sitting.

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

SAMEORD, J.

The homicide was the culmination of an altercation beginning in Ellington’s store in Goldhill, Ala. The par-, ties were first heard cursing each other in Ellington’s store; defendant drew his pistol; they both came out of the store; Bullard, the deceased, went off and in a few minutes returned with a pistol; Watson went to the store of Woody about 30 or 35 yards away, Bullard and his brother following him, when further words wer.e passed. Watson went out of the Woody store, the two Bullards going to the porch of the store; Watson dared them to get on the ground; the Bul-lards got on the ground; Watson fired, killing one of the Bullards, the whole time from the first words passing between the parties in Ellington’s store to the shooting, being variously estimated at from 5 to 15 minutes, and the entire distance covered being about 35 yards. The whole was one transaction. Page v. State, 17 Ala. App. 70, 81 South. 848. The foregoing disposes of the exceptions reserved to the admissibility of the evidence and to the refusal of the court to give charge D.

Erom the evidence in this case it was-a question for the jury to say whether the two Bullards pursued defendant from Ellington’s store to Woody’s store, and therefore charge B was properly refused.

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

Affirmed.

MERRITT, J., not sitting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

94 So. 787, 19 Ala. App. 59, 1922 Ala. App. LEXIS 35, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/watson-v-state-alactapp-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack