Biddle v. State, 7 Div. 889.
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
| Writing for the Court | FOSTER, J. |
| Citation | 100 So. 572,20 Ala.App. 49 |
| Decision Date | 10 June 1924 |
| Docket Number | 7 Div. 889. |
| Parties | BIDDLE v. STATE. |
100 So. 572
20 Ala.App. 49
BIDDLE
v.
STATE.
7 Div. 889.
Court of Appeals of Alabama
June 10, 1924
Appeal from Circuit Court, De Kalb County; W. W. Haralson, Judge.
Houston Biddle was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and appeals. Affirmed.
Isbell & Scott, of Fort Payne, for appellant.
Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., for the State.
FOSTER, J.
The indictment contained two counts; the first count charged the manufacture of prohibited liquors, and the second [100 So. 573.] count charged the possession of a still. There was a general verdict of guilty.
The appellant, defendant in the court below, applied for a continuance of the case on the ground that he had been ordered by the government authorities to New Orleans for physical examination.
The granting or refusal of an application for continuance is matter of discretion with the trial court, and its action thereon is not revisable on appeal. Carr v. State, 104 Ala. 4, 16 So. 150; Lowery v. State, 98 Ala. 45, 13 So. 498.
While continuances are discretionary with the trial court, there may be such a gross abuse of the discretion as to authorize a reversal, but such abuse is not shown, when the defendant exhibits a letter from a United States government official directing that he proceed to a city outside this state for a physical examination. And the remark of the court that he could be examined as well "down there" as at New Orleans will not work a reversal for the refusal of the court to grant a continuance.
The evidence of the state was directed to showing that the defendant and others were found at a whisky still in full operation. The defendant's counsel insist that there was no sufficient corroboration of the evidence of the accomplice, Johnnie Robinson to justify a conviction. A conviction for a felony cannot be had on the uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice. Section 7897, Code of 1907.
The recent unexplained possession of stolen property has been held sufficient corroboration of the evidence of an accomplice to support a conviction for felony. Malachi v. State, 89 Ala. 134, 8 So. 104.
Evidence that the defendant was present when the hog alleged to have been stolen was killed and assisted in carrying it away was held sufficient to corroborate the evidence of an accomplice on the trial for larceny. Snoddy v. State, 75 Ala. 23.
In the instant case, after proper predicate to show that the confession was voluntary, the witness Camp testified...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Burns v. State, 6 Div. 965.
...but was merely the means employed of disposing of the matter or suggestion for expedition, at that point of the trial. Biddle v. State, 20 Ala. App. 49, 100 So. 572. The court had qualified the jury and refused to allow counsel to cross-examine or interrogate each juror personally. The stat......
-
Jones v. State, 3 Div. 914
...affirmative charge as insisted. Clark v. State, Ala.App., 43 So.2d 431; Harris v. State, 32 Ala.App. 519, 27 So.2d 794; Biddle v. State, 20 Ala.App. 49, 100 So. 572; Snoddy v. State, 75 Ala. 23; Lowe v. State, 32 Ala.App. 176, 22 So.2d The familiar applicable rule will not permit us to hold......
-
Dixon v. State, 8 Div. 934
...a defendant charged with, and who is on trial for, a criminal offense. Biddle v. State, 19 Ala.App. 563, 99 So. 59; Biddle v. State, 20 Ala.App. 49, 100 So. 572. This general statement, while still adhered to, cannot be so extended as to invade the province of the jury in passing upon the g......
-
Morgan v. State, 8 Div. 168
...a defendant charged with, and who is on trial for, a criminal offense. Biddle v. State, 19 Ala.App. 563, 99 So. 59; Biddle v. State, 20 Ala.App. 49, 100 So. 572. This general statement, while still adhered to, cannot be so extended as to invade the province of the jury in passing upon the g......
-
Burns v. State, 6 Div. 965.
...but was merely the means employed of disposing of the matter or suggestion for expedition, at that point of the trial. Biddle v. State, 20 Ala. App. 49, 100 So. 572. The court had qualified the jury and refused to allow counsel to cross-examine or interrogate each juror personally. The stat......
-
Jones v. State, 3 Div. 914
...affirmative charge as insisted. Clark v. State, Ala.App., 43 So.2d 431; Harris v. State, 32 Ala.App. 519, 27 So.2d 794; Biddle v. State, 20 Ala.App. 49, 100 So. 572; Snoddy v. State, 75 Ala. 23; Lowe v. State, 32 Ala.App. 176, 22 So.2d The familiar applicable rule will not permit us to hold......
-
Dixon v. State, 8 Div. 934
...a defendant charged with, and who is on trial for, a criminal offense. Biddle v. State, 19 Ala.App. 563, 99 So. 59; Biddle v. State, 20 Ala.App. 49, 100 So. 572. This general statement, while still adhered to, cannot be so extended as to invade the province of the jury in passing upon the g......
-
Morgan v. State, 8 Div. 168
...a defendant charged with, and who is on trial for, a criminal offense. Biddle v. State, 19 Ala.App. 563, 99 So. 59; Biddle v. State, 20 Ala.App. 49, 100 So. 572. This general statement, while still adhered to, cannot be so extended as to invade the province of the jury in passing upon the g......