Capps v. State
Decision Date | 09 January 1940 |
Docket Number | 6 Div. 491. |
Citation | 29 Ala.App. 192,194 So. 689 |
Parties | CAPPS v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Rehearing Denied Feb. 27, 1940.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Walker County; D. A. McGregor, Special Judge.
Walter Capps was convicted of perjury, and he appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
Certiorari denied by Supreme Court in Capps v. State, 6 Div. 652, 194 So. 693.
Chas. R. Wiggins and Carl A. Elloitt, both of Jasper, for appellant.
Thos S. Lawson, Atty. Gen., and Francis M. Kohn, Asst. Atty. Gen for the State.
The indictment was in four counts as follows:
This prosecution was brought under Section 5159 of the Code of 1923 and each count thereof conforms to Form 81, Section 4556 of the Code of 1923; and each of said counts sufficiently charge the offense and are not subject to any of the demurrers interposed, Code of 1923, Sections 5159 and 5160.
Where an indictment charges perjury in that the defendant willfully and corruptly swore falsely to certain material facts, it is incumbent upon the State to prove the allegations in the indictment as therein laid; and the falsity of the testimony, as to each material allegation, must be established by the testimony of more than one witness or by the testimony of one witness strongly corroborated by circumstances. Wofford v. State, 21 Ala.App. 521, 109 So. 886 ; Id., 215 Ala. 106, 109 So. 887.
A defendant cannot be convicted of perjury on the uncorroborated evidence of a single witness. McDaniel v. State, 13 Ala.App. 318, 69 So. 351; Id., 193 Ala. 678, 69 So. 1018.
In the instant case there is no sufficient evidence to authorize a conviction under count one of this indictment. There is only one witness to the allegation: "* * * A few days after this alleged assault was committed on this girl I didn't tell Mr. White, the father of Gertrude White, in the presence of Berry Justice that I had been running around with Hoyt Clark and the other boys but I was glad of one thing and that was I was at home sleep in bed." This material allegation in the indictment was testified to by only one witness without corroboration, and would entitle the defendant to the affirmative charge as to this count. However, the affirmative charge as to this count was not requested and no exception to the ruling on the motion for a new trial appears in the bill of exceptions so the question is not before us for...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gordon v. State
...and subornation. The result was that a mass of irrelevant although harmful testimony was presented to the trial jury. Capps v. State, 1940, 29 Ala.App. 192, 194 So. 689; Saucier v. State, 95 Miss. 226, 48 So. Appellant King further contends that the trial judge committed error when he allow......
-
State v. Naranjo
...not presented to the jury. It is incumbent upon the State to prove the allegations of the indictment as therein laid. Capps v. State, 29 Ala.App. 192, 194 So. 689 (1940). A material variance existed between the allegations in the indictment and the proof. Commonwealth v. Karafin, 224 Pa.Sup......
-
Moore v. State, 6 Div. 939.
... ... injurious impression thus created as to rescue the case from ... prejudicial error ... There ... are many analogous cases. In addition to those already cited, ... some others are: Kennamer v. State, 28 Ala.App. 317, ... 183 So. 892; Capps v. State, 29 Ala.App. 192, 194 ... So. 689; Stephens v. State, 17 Ala.App. 548, 86 So ... 111, 112 ... In so ... concluding, we recognize fully the favorable presumption to ... be accorded the ... [9 So.2d 150.] ... rulings at nisi prius and the caution to be observed in ... ...
-
Wilbanks v. State
...200 Ala. 154, 75 So. 902. The State bears the burden of persuasion here. Pelham v. State, 23 Ala.App. 359, 125 So. 688; Capps v. State, 29 Ala.App. 192, 194 So. 689. ...