Brasher v. State, 7 Div. 145
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
| Citation | 107 So. 727,21 Ala.App. 309 |
| Docket Number | 7 Div. 145 |
| Parties | BRASHER v. STATE. |
| Decision Date | 23 March 1926 |
BRASHER
v.
STATE.
7 Div. 145
Court of Appeals of Alabama
March 23, 1926
Appeal from Circuit Court, Shelby County; E.S. Lyman, Judge.
Charlie Brasher was convicted of violating the prohibition laws, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.
Leeper, Wallace & Saxon, of Columbiana, for appellant.
[21 Ala.App. 310] Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., and Thos. E. Knight, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
RICE, J.
Appellant was charged in separate counts in an indictment with, first distilling, etc., prohibited liquors; and, second, having possession, etc., of a still, etc., to be used in the manufacture of prohibited liquors.
There was a general verdict of guilty as charged in the indictment. No evidence being contained in the record to support the first count of the indictment, it was error to refuse the general affirmative charge in his favor as to said count, duly requested by appellant. Winchester v. State, 102 So. 595, 20 Ala.App. 431.
The opinion in the case of Carr v. State, 85 So. 852, 17 Ala.App. 539, is a direct authority for our holding, and we do hold, that the admission in evidence of the testimony of the witness Buckner as to the statements in the nature of admissions of guilt made by the defendant at or about the time of his arrest was error. As stated in the Carr Case, supra, a proper predicate for the admission of this testimony required that it be first shown that none of those present, and here there were shown to be several, offered defendant any inducements, or made threats, etc., to get him to make the statement testified about.
The other questions presented involve no principles of law that have not been many times announced and gone over by this court,. and will probably not arise in their present form on another trial. Hence a discussion of them here will be pretermitted.
For the errors pointed out, the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded.
Reversed and remanded.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jackson v. State, 3 Div. 880.
...of a substantial right of review. Jones v. State, 236 Ala. 30, 182 So. 404; Hawes v. State, 216 Ala. 151, 112 So. 761; Brasher v. State, 21 Ala.App. 309, 107 So. 727. We pass now to a consideration of the question of whether or not the court erred in refusing the general affirmative charge ......
-
Murchinson v. State, 5 Div. 111.
...duly requested by defendant, that they could not convict defendant under the third count for the larceny of the money. Brasher v. State, 21 Ala.App. 309, 107 So. 727; Dorsey v. State, Ala. 553, 33 So. 350; Walling v. Fields, 209 Ala. 389, 96 So. 471." (Italics supplied by us.) The fault wit......
-
Moore v. State, 5 Div. 287
...review of a presented question. Hawes v. State, 216 Ala. 151, 112 So. 761; Jones v. State, 236 Ala. 30, 182 So. 404; Brasher v. State, 21 Ala.App. 309, 107 So. 727; Jackson v. State, 33 Ala.App. 42, 31 So.2d 514, certiorari denied 249 Ala. 348, 31 So.2d As we pointed out in the recent case ......
-
Erskine v. State, 8 Div. 306
...affidavit or complaint against him, and, notwithstanding his environment at the time of his arrest, the usual presumption of innocence [21 Ala.App. 309] attended the accused which the law provides in all criminal cases. Reversed and remanded. ...