Wilson v. State

134 So. 457, 24 Ala. App. 280, 1931 Ala. App. LEXIS 279
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Wilson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 22 Ala. App. 554
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided March 24, 1931·No. 8 Div. 295.·Published

Opinion

SAMFORD, J.

It is insisted that the defendant’s .motion for a new trial should have been granted on account of the character and weight of the evidence. We have read the record and the evidence adduced on the trial, and, while the character of evidence'may not be as strong as in some cases, it was sufficient, if believed beyond a reasonable doubt, to warrant a verdict of guilt. Where this is the case, this court will not reverse the finding of the trial judge, who had the advantage of hearing and seeing the witnesses.

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

Affirmed.

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

Wilson v. State, 134 So. 457, 24 Ala. App. 280, 1931 Ala. App. LEXIS 279 (Ala. Ct. App. 1931).

134 So. 457 (Wilson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.