Berry v. State
| Citation | 179 So.2d 428,43 Ala.App. 60 |
| Decision Date | 13 October 1965 |
| Docket Number | 4 Div. 540 |
| Parties | Emmett BERRY v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Allen Cook, Andalusia, for appellant.
Richmond M. Flowers, Atty. Gen., and John C. Tyson, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
This cause was submitted September 9, 1965.
Berry appeals from a judgment on a general verdict of guilt.
The Court adjudicated him guilty of grand larceny (a charge found in count 2 of the indictment) 1 and sentenced him to four years in the penitentiary.
When the State rested, defense counsel moved to exclude the evidence because, under Code 1940, T. 15, § 307, 2 there was no corroboration to the required degree of the testimony of witnesses, who, if at all connected in the crime with the defendant, were self admitted accomplices.
We have carefully reviewed the evidence adduced by the State. Since there is but a vacuum of negative proportions, a recital of facts would serve no purpose.
We conclude the motion to exclude should have been granted. Lindsey v. State, 170 Ala. 80, 54 So. 516; Sorrell v. State, 249 Ala. 292, 31 So.2d 82; King v. State, 23 Ala.App. 55, 120 So. 466; Fitts v. State, 24 Ala.App. 405, 135 So. 654; Parish v. State, 28 Ala.App. 81, 179 So. 387; and Brown v. State, 31 Ala.App. 529, 19 So.2d 88.
The judgment below is reversed and the cause remanded for new trial.
Reversed and remanded.
1 The other court was for burglary in the second degree.
2
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Davis v. State
...or likelihood of human conduct would not be of substantive character). Evans v. State, 42 Ala.App. 587, 172 So.2d 796; Berry v. State, 43 Ala.App. 60, 179 So.2d 428; Cooper v. State, 43 Ala.App. 385, 191 So.2d 224; King v. State, 44 Ala.App. ---, 203 So.2d 466; McElroy, Law of Evidence in A......
-
Steidl v. State
...591, 139 So. 437; Commander v. State, 28 Ala.App. 42, 178 So. 241; Evans v. State, 42 Ala.App. 587, 172 So.2d 796; Berry v. State, 43 Ala.App. 60, 179 So.2d 428; Cooper v. State, 43 Ala.App. 385, 191 So.2d 224; King v. State, 44 Ala.App. 119, 203 So.2d 466; Anderson v. State, 44 Ala.App. 38......
- Harris v. State
-
Davis v. State
...an accomplice, whose testimony without proper corroboration was insufficient to fasten guilt upon this defendant.)" In Berry v. State, 43 Ala.App. 60, 179 So.2d 428, the Court of Appeals reversed a judgment of grand larceny because of a denial of a motion to exclude the evidence on the basi......