Wilkerson v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Wilkerson v. State

68 So. 475, 12 Ala. App. 100, 1915 Ala. App. LEXIS 131

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 8, 1915

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 68 So. 475 (Wilkerson 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

Wilkerson v. State, 68 So. 475, 12 Ala. App. 100, 1915 Ala. App. LEXIS 131 (Ala. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

BROWN, J.

The defendant had no legal right to take the mules from the possession of the witness, Cora Knight, by force, and if, as the evidence offered by the state tends to show, defendant in order to gain possession of the mules, laid hands on the witness in a rude, rough, or angry manner and thrust her aside, he is guilty of an assault and battery.—Jacobi v. State, 133 Ala. 8, 32 South. 158; Murdock v. State, 65 Ala. 520.

■ The fact that the defendant had in his possession a mortgage on these mules and was acting as agent of another to take them, afforded no justification or excuse for committing a breach of the peace. The law affords a remedy for the protection of private rights and ad[101]*101monishes all persons, who feel that their rights have been invaded, to seek relief through the remedies it affords. “The public peace is a superior consideration to any one man’s private property; and if individuals were once allowed to use private force as a remedy for private injuries, all social justice must cease, the strong would give law to the weak, and every man would revert to a state of nature.”—Hendrix v. State, 50 Ala. 148; Ward v. State, 28 Ala. 53.

The trial court ruled in accordance with these principles, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

BROWN, J.

The defendant had no legal right to take the mules from the possession of the witness, Cora Knight, by force, and if, as the evidence offered by the state tends to show, defendant in order to gain possession of the mules, laid hands on the witness in a rude, rough, or angry manner and thrust her aside, he is guilty of an assault and battery.—Jacobi v. State, 133 Ala. 8, 32 South. 158; Murdock v. State, 65 Ala. 520.

■ The fact that the defendant had in his possession a mortgage on these mules and was acting as agent of another to take them, afforded no justification or excuse for committing a breach of the peace. The law affords a remedy for the protection of private rights and ad[101]*101monishes all persons, who feel that their rights have been invaded, to seek relief through the remedies it affords. “The public peace is a superior consideration to any one man’s private property; and if individuals were once allowed to use private force as a remedy for private injuries, all social justice must cease, the strong would give law to the weak, and every man would revert to a state of nature.”—Hendrix v. State, 50 Ala. 148; Ward v. State, 28 Ala. 53.

The trial court ruled in accordance with these principles, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

68 So. 475, 12 Ala. App. 100, 1915 Ala. App. LEXIS 131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilkerson-v-state-alactapp-1915.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack