Bowden v. State
| Decision Date | 13 January 1891 |
| Citation | 8 So. 694,91 Ala. 61 |
| Parties | BOWDEN v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from circuit court, Henry county; J. M. CARMICHAEL, Judge.
The appellant in this case was indicted, tried, and convicted of playing cards in a public house or a public place. On the trial, it was shown by several witnesses, introduced on behalf of the state, that the defendant was engaged in a game of cards within 12 months before the finding of the indictment, in a bedroom occupied by Holt and Wilson; that there had been several games of cards played in the room, but no one of the witnesses ever saw but the one game of cards played in the said room; but it was testified by one that he gained admittance by knocking, and one of the players came and opened the door for him. The court gave the general charge for the state, and the defendant duly excepted.
Walker & Espy, for appellant.
W L. Martin, Atty. Gen., for the State.
The bill of exceptions in this case purports to set out all the evidence. It fails to show that there was any evidence of venue adduced. The court, at the request in writing of the solicitor, charged the jury that, if they believed the evidence, they would find the defendant guilty. This instruction, of course, raised and decided the question of the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction. Its effect was to direct and require a conviction without proof that the offense was committed within the territorial jurisdiction of the court. Had there been no instruction going to the sufficiency of the evidence to convict, no reversal could be had on account of this absence of evidence of venue from a bill of exceptions, reciting that it contains all the evidence, there being no point made in that connection in the court below. But that is not the case here. The charge asserts that the evidence of the act charged without any proof that it was committed in the county, is sufficient to authorized and support a conviction. This was error which must work a reversal of the judgment. Hubbard v. State, 72 Ala. 164. We suggest, without deciding whether the general charge given for the state was not open to objection from another point of view, in that the evidence possibly left it to rest in inference that the room in which the playing was done, not per se a public house "was free of access to all who were known to engage in gaming," or that "it was common to all who would gratify...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Denton v. State
...Hubbard v. State, 72 Ala. 164, 169; Justice v. State, 99 Ala. 180, 13 So. 658; Johnson v. State, 100 Ala. 55, 14 So. 627; Bowdon v. State, 91 Ala. 61, 8 So. 694; Ex parte Knight, 61 Ala. State's witness Jones had testified that defendant told him in Jacksonville, Florida, after the remains ......
-
Watts v. State
...Hubbard v. State, 72 Ala. 164, 169; Justice v. State, 99 Ala. 180, 13 So. 658; Johnson v. State, 100 Ala. 55, 14 So. 627; Bowdon v. State, 91 Ala. 61, 8 So. 694; Ex parte Knight, 61 Ala. The judgment entry showed a sufficient pronouncement by the court of sentence of death upon the defendan......
-
Hammond v. State
... ... Such is the settled rule, on ... principle and in practice, by which this ... [109 So. 173.] ... court is bound. Knapp v. McBride, 7 Ala. 19; ... Skinner v. State, 30 Ala. 524; Hubbard v ... State, 72 Ala. 164; Dentler v. State, 112 Ala ... 70, 20 So. 592; Bowden v. State, 91 Ala. 61, 8 So ... 694; Ex parte Knight, 61 Ala. 482; Watts v. State, ... 204 Ala. 372, 86 So. 70; Moragne v. State, 16 Ala ... App. 26, 74 So. 862; Morrissette v. State, 16 Ala ... App. 32, 75 So. 177; Strickland v. Town of Samson, ... 16 Ala. App. 592, 80 So. 166; Marshall v ... ...
-
McClendon v. State
...a reversal of the judgment of conviction. "A conviction in a criminal case can never be had except upon proof of the venue." Bowdon v. State, 91 Ala. 61, 8 So. 694; Justice v. State, 99 Ala. 180, 13 So. Randolph v. State, 100 Ala. 139, 14 So. 792. A reading of all the evidence on the subjec......