West v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

West v. State

123 So. 292, 23 Ala. App. 268, 1929 Ala. App. LEXIS 211

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 29, 1929

Docket7 Div. 523.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 123 So. 292 (West 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

West v. State, 123 So. 292, 23 Ala. App. 268, 1929 Ala. App. LEXIS 211 (Ala. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, P. J.

This appellant was indicted, tried, and convicted, and sentenced to the penitentiary, for distilling, making, or manufacturing alcoholic, spirituous, or malted liquors,'and for the possession of a still to be used for that purpose.

Under the undisputed evidence in this case the accused was entitled to his discharge. This evidence barely raises a suspicion against the defendant. It consists of the testimony of certain witnesses, who found a still and other contraband articles in a pine thicket 200 yards from the home of the defendant ; this and nothing more. There was no semblance of evidencé showing, or tending to show, that the accused had ever been at the still, or that he knew of its existence. All of the evidence is to the contrary, and without dispute disclosed that at the time of the so-called “raid” the defendant was in another State, and had been for some time. This court is at a loss to understand how a conviction of any person could be rested upon such evidence. A presumption of innocence attended this defendant upon his trial. The evidence adduced was wholly inadequate to overcome such presumption. The state manifestly failed to meet the burden of proof necessary to a conviction.

*269 For the error in not granting defendant’s motion for a new trial, the judgment of conviction from which this appeal was taken is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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

BRICKEN, P. J.

This appellant was indicted, tried, and convicted, and sentenced to the penitentiary, for distilling, making, or manufacturing alcoholic, spirituous, or malted liquors,'and for the possession of a still to be used for that purpose.

Under the undisputed evidence in this case the accused was entitled to his discharge. This evidence barely raises a suspicion against the defendant. It consists of the testimony of certain witnesses, who found a still and other contraband articles in a pine thicket 200 yards from the home of the defendant ; this and nothing more. There was no semblance of evidencé showing, or tending to show, that the accused had ever been at the still, or that he knew of its existence. All of the evidence is to the contrary, and without dispute disclosed that at the time of the so-called “raid” the defendant was in another State, and had been for some time. This court is at a loss to understand how a conviction of any person could be rested upon such evidence. A presumption of innocence attended this defendant upon his trial. The evidence adduced was wholly inadequate to overcome such presumption. The state manifestly failed to meet the burden of proof necessary to a conviction.

*269 For the error in not granting defendant’s motion for a new trial, the judgment of conviction from which this appeal was taken is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 So. 292, 23 Ala. App. 268, 1929 Ala. App. LEXIS 211, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/west-v-state-alactapp-1929.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack