Adams v. State

• Court: Supreme Court of Alabama
• Writing for the Court: DE GRAFFENRIED, J.
• Citation: 61 So. 352,181 Ala. 58
• Parties: ADAMS v. STATE.
• Decision Date: 13 February 1913

61 So. 352

181 Ala. 58

ADAMS v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

February 13, 1913

Rehearing Denied March 17, 1913

Appeal from City Court of Montgomery; Armstead Brown, Judge.

John Adams was convicted of murder in the first degree, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Tilley & Elmore, of Montgomery, for appellant.

R.C Brickell, Atty. Gen., and W.L. Martin, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

DE GRAFFENRIED, J.

This is the second appeal in this case. See Adams v. State, 57 So. 591.

(1) One of the contentions of the defendant is that the trial court committed reversible error in refusing to grant him a change of venue.

On October 6, 1910, the defendant, who is a negro, was convicted for the murder of a white man, who, at the time of his death was a member of the police force of the city of Montgomery. The homicide was committed shortly before the finding of the indictment; and for some time after the homicide the newspapers of the city of Montgomery published articles which, for the purpose of this opinion, may be conceded to have been well calculated to damage the defendant in the estimation of the public and to create passion and prejudice against him. The sheriff, it seems, guarded the jail, and at one time, for the protection of the defendant, called out the state troops, who were in Montgomery.

The defendant was tried in March, 1911, and large numbers of people attended the trial. The defendant, at the trial, was found guilty of murder in the first degree, and was sentenced to death. At the conclusion of the trial the trial judge made the statement, in open court, that he was of the opinion that every one who had heard the trial believed that the defendant had received a fair trial, and that the verdict was a just one. This statement of the trial judge also found its way into the Montgomery papers, and is claimed by the defendant to have added to the alleged prevailing impression of his guilt.

The case was appealed to this court, and the judgment of the trial court was reversed by this court in January, 1912. This feature of the case was also commented upon, and in one of the papers it was stated that as soon as the above decision of this court was announced the sheriff took precautions against any possible effort that might be taken to take the negro from prison.

The motion for a change of venue was overruled on March 9, 1912 16 months after the homicide, 12 months after the first trial, and 2 months after the above decision of this court was rendered in the cause.

There appears to have been great popular passion and prejudice against the defendant, certainly for a time after the commission of the homicide; but the defendant, to entitle himself to a change of venue, was required by the law to show to the trial judge, by his application and the evidence in support of it, that when he made the application the situation in Montgomery county was such that he could not reasonably be expected to obtain a fair and an impartial trial.

The act approved August 26, 1909, entitled "An act to amend section 7851 of the Code of Alabama" (see Acts Special Session 1909, p. 212), provides that the refusal of an application for a change of venue may, "after final judgment, be reviewed and revised on appeal, and the Supreme Court shall reverse and remand or render such judgment on such application, as it may deem right, without any presumption in favor of the judgment or ruling of the lower court on said application."

This act, of course, emphasizes the legislative purpose to secure if possible, a fair and an impartial trial for every one who is charged with the infraction of our criminal laws. It...