Berry v. State, 1 Div. 271
Decision Date | 06 October 1981 |
Docket Number | 1 Div. 271 |
Citation | 408 So.2d 548 |
Parties | Donald H. BERRY v. STATE of Alabama. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
J. D. Quinlivan, Jr., Mobile, for appellant.
Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen. and Charles M. Allen, II, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Donald Berry was indicted by the grand jury for buying, receiving, or concealing stolen property contrary to § 13-3-55 Code of Alabama 1975. At trial, the jury found the appellant "guilty as charged." The trial court sentenced him to ten years' imprisonment. From that conviction he now appeals.
Taken in its light most favorable to the state, the evidence revealed that after several previous contacts with appellant and two others on September 4, 1979, two undercover agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms of the U.S. Department of Treasury purchased several pieces of office equipment and several heavy duty batteries and drums of diesel oil. The agents were working in connection with the Mobile District Attorney's Office and the Alabama Bureau of Investigation. While appellant was not present at the culmination of the sale, he was present during most of the negotiations leading up to the sale.
The appellant had initially displayed most of the equipment to one of the agents at a prior meeting on July 31, 1979. At another meeting at appellant's house on August 2, 1979, appellant exhibited another piece of equipment. All of the merchandise was identified as having been stolen from a Mobile business and office supply company on July 31, 1979.
The appellant raises no issue on appeal as to the sufficiency of the state's evidence.
The appellant contends that the trial court erred to reversal in overruling his objections to the district attorney's questions during cross-examination where the state attempted to impeach his character by introducing evidence of a prior felony conviction. R. 88.
In both instances, appellant's objections came after he had answered the question. There was no motion to exclude the answer. Thus, the objection came too late. Tuck v. State, 384 So.2d 1240 (Ala.Cr.App.1980); Williams v. State, 383 So.2d 547 (Ala.Cr.App.1979), affirmed 383 So.2d 564 (Ala.1980) and cases cited therein. Further such question concerning a prior felony conviction was proper.
Appellant argues that the trial judge erred in asking him what felony he had been convicted of. Appellant objected stating: "I object to the Court asking him." No other ground of objection was offered. From the record, R. 94-95:
After answering, appellant did not move to exclude it, to have the jury instructed to disregard it, or for a mistrial.
Specific grounds for an objection waive all grounds not specified, and the trial court will not be put in error on grounds not assigned at trial. Delarosa v. State, 384 So.2d 876 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 384 So.2d 880 (Ala.1980); Williams v. State, 377 So.2d 634, (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 377 So.2d 639 (Ala.1979); 6B Alabama Digest Criminal Law 1043(1).
As stated by this court in Sprinkle v. State, 368 So.2d 554, 562 (Ala.Cr.App.1978), cert. denied, 368 So.2d 565 (Ala.1979):
(Citations omitted).
We find no error in the trial court asking appellant the above question.
Lastly, appellant contends that the trial court erred in charging the jury that the possession of recently stolen property did not raise a presumption as a matter of law as to the possessor's guilt, but rather raised a presumption as a matter of fact to be considered by it. He asserts that it raises only an inference of guilt.
We find no error in the trial court's charge. Buckles v. State, 291 Ala. 359, 280 So.2d 823 (1973); Wilson v. State, 361 So.2d 1167 (Ala.Cr.App.1978); Milligan v. State 45 Ala.App. 112, 226 So.2d 172 (1969) and cases cited therein; see also Stamps v. State, 380 So.2d 406 (Ala.Cr.App.1980); Waters v. State, 360 So.2d 358, (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 360 So.2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hunt v. State
......Attys. Gen., for appellee. . PER CURIAM. 1 . Harold Guy Hunt, the Governor of the State of Alabama, ......
-
Lee v. State, 6 Div. 719
......16 reads as follows: . "16. A person commits a crime of manslaughter: (1) if he recklessly causes the death of another person; or (2) if he causes the death of another ... The statement of specific grounds for an objection waives all grounds not specified. Berry v. State, 408 So.2d 548, 550 (Ala.Cr.App.1981), cert. denied, 408 So.2d 551 (Ala.1982); Snider v. ......
-
Trawick v. State, 4 Div. 38
......431 So.2d 574. Hilry TRAWICK. v. STATE. 4 Div. 38. Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama. Feb. 1, 1983. Rehearing Denied March 1, 1983. Certiorari Denied May 20, 1983. Alabama Supreme Court ... Lawrence v. State, 409 So.2d 987 (Ala.Cr.App.1982); Berry v. State, 408 So.2d 548 (Ala.Cr.App.1981), cert. denied, 408 So.2d 551 (Ala.1982); Streeter v. ......
-
Vrocher v. State
......See Berry v. State, 408 So.2d 548 (Ala. Crim.App.1981), cert. denied, 408 So.2d 551 ......