Worley v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Worley v. State

96 So. 2d 707, 39 Ala. App. 169, 1957 Ala. App. LEXIS 125, 1957 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 40

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 13, 1957

Docket4 Div. 349

StatusPublished

This text of 96 So. 2d 707 (Worley 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

Worley v. State, 96 So. 2d 707, 39 Ala. App. 169, 1957 Ala. App. LEXIS 125, 1957 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 40 (Ala. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

HARWOOD, Presiding Judge.

This appellant’s jury trial has resulted in a verdict and judgment of guilty of driving while intoxicated.

In the court below the appellant conducted his own defense. He also argued his own case in this court.

We have carefully read the record. The State’s evidence was amply sufficient to sustain the verdict and judgment.

While the appellant’s evidence was contradictory of the State’s, this of course but raised a question of fact for the jury to resolve.

The court’s ruling was invoked only once, and is so patently correct as to make discussion unwarranted.

We have already stated that the evidence presented by the State was sufficient to sustain the judgment. This aside however, there was no motion to exclude the evidence, no request for the affirmative charge, and no motion for a new trial. The sufficiency of the evidence, not being raised in the trial court, is not actually before us. Waller v. State, 35 Ala.App. 511, 49 So.2d 232; Barnes v. State, 31 Ala.App. 349, 18 So.2d 110.

It follows that this judgment must be affirmed, and it is so ordered.

Affirmed.

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