Weaver v. State

139 Ala. 130
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided November 15, 1903·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

TYSON, J. —

Only one exception was reserved during the trial as to the admissibility of evidence. The objection interposed was general — no ground whatever being stated. A part of the statement to which the objection was taken was clearly legal, and if it be conceded that the other portion was not, the court was under no duty to separate the legal from the illegal. — Wright v. State, 136 Ala. 139; Davis v. State, 131 Ala. 10; Roy v. State, 126 Ala. 9, and cases there cited.

We cannot affirm that the court clearly erred in its fouling of fact that the defendant was guilty as charged. The motion to discharge him was properly overruled.

Affirmed.

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

Weaver v. State, 139 Ala. 130 (Ala. 1903).

139 Ala. 130 (Weaver v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Louisville & Nashville R. R. v. Blankenship
74 So. 960 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1917)
Montgomery-Moore Mfg. Co. v. Leeth
56 So. 770 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1911)