Baader v. State

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals
Citation16 Ala.App. 144,75 So. 820
Docket Number6 Div. 250
Decision Date05 June 1917

Rehearing Denied June 26, 1917

Appeal from Cullman County Court; R.I. Burke, Judge.

G Baader was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and he appeals. Affirmed.

The facts sufficiently appear.

The following charges were refused to defendant:

(1) If, after considering all the evidence in the case, there is a probability of defendant's innocence, you should acquit him.
(2) If, after the entire jury considered this case, any individual member of the jury has a reasonable doubt as to defendant's guilt, the jury should find defendant not guilty, even though all the other members of the jury have no such reasonable doubt.

Tumlin & Ingram and Emil Ahlrichs, all of Cullman, for appellant.

W.L Martin, Atty. Gen., and P.W. Turner, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.


The defendant was charged by affidavit with a violation of the prohibition law. The affidavit contained two counts--one charged that he sold, and the other that he kept for sale, or had in his possession for sale, etc. The defendant was convicted, and from the judgment of conviction he appeals.

The prosecution was begun by affidavit in the county court of Cullman county, in which court a jury is provided, and is when organized, a part of the court. The defendant did not demand a jury trial, but, on the contrary, insisted that he should be tried by the court, without a jury. The record shows that the solicitor demanded a jury several months after the prosecution was begun. It is provided by Acts of the Legislature of 1900-01, p. 1343, that the judge shall try cases without a jury unless a jury is demanded. There is no time for the demand fixed by that act, and therefore the solicitor was within his rights unless otherwise concluded. The provisions for a jury trial in section 32 of the Prohibition Law (Acts 1915, p. 32) are for the protection of the defendant, in securing to him the right of trial by jury and do not apply to the state. The right of "trial by jury" is one of the bulwarks of the liberties of the citizen, and, when a defendant has had a fair trial by a jury of his peers, he has had what the law guarantees him.

There are several exceptions to the refusal of the court to give charges in writing as requested by the defendant. The general charge of the court is not set out in the record, as required by Acts 1915, ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Baader v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • December 20, 1917
    ...was convicted of a violation of the prohibition law, and he appealed to the Court of Appeals, which affirmed the judgment of conviction (75 So. 820). Defendant certiorari. Writ granted, and judgment reversed, and cause remanded. Tumlin & Ingram and Emil Ahlrichs, all of Cullman, for appella......
  • Hardley v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • May 16, 1918
    ... ... was substantially and fairly given to the jury in the ... court's general charge. Gen.Acts 1915, p. 815; ... Clinton Mining Co. v. Bradford, 76 So. 74, 79; ... West v. Arrington, 76 So. 352; Jeffries v ... Pitts, 75 So. 959, 965; Baader v. State, 75 So ... 820; Tarwater v. State, 75 So. 816; Reynolds v ... State, 196 Ala. 586, 72 So. 20 ... The ... judgment of the circuit court is affirmed ... Affirmed ... ANDERSON, ... C.J., and MAYFIELD, SAYRE, SOMERVILLE, and GARDNER, JJ., ... concur ... ...
  • Baader v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • January 15, 1918
    ...Atty. Gen., for the State. PER CURIAM. Reversed and remanded in accordance with the opinion of the Supreme Court (77 So. 370). See, also, 75 So. 820. ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT