Carr v. State
| Decision Date | 16 March 1926 |
| Docket Number | 7 Div. 203 |
| Parties | CARR v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Clay County; E.S. Lyman, Judge.
Wes Carr was convicted of violating the prohibition laws, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.
Pruet & Glass, of Ashland, for appellant.
Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., and Thos. E. Knight, Jr., Asst. Atty Gen., for the State.
Appellant was convicted of the offense of "attempting to distill prohibited liquors," etc.
What was said by the defendant at the time of his arrest, at the scene, and upon the occasion, of the alleged crime, was admissible as a part of the res gestae. Barfield et al v. State, 97 So. 378, 19 Ala.App. 374; Turner v State, 85 So. 849, 17 Ala. App.514. True, these statements were in the nature of a confession or an admission of guilt, but this in no wise alters the propriety of their admission in evidence under the principle named, even though there had been first offered no sufficient independent proof of the corpus delicti.
But a mere extrajudicial confession, uncorroborated by other facts is not sufficient to show the corpus delicti, and cannot support a conviction. This, though evidence of facts and circumstances, attending the particular offense, or of facts having a just tendency to lead the mind to the conclusion that the offense has been committed, would be admissible to corroborate the confession. And, though it must be considered as settled that inconclusive facts and circumstances tending prima facie to show the corpus delicti may be aided by the admissions or confession of the accused, so as to satisfy the jury beyond a reasonable doubt, and so to support a conviction.
A careful consideration of the evidence adduced on the trial of this case, by the entire court sitting en banc, has led us to the conclusion that, independent of the admissions or confession of the defendant, let in as a part of the res gestae, it does not afford any legitimate inference of the commission of any crime, and that therefore there was no evidence of the corpus delicti sufficient to authorize the conviction of the defendant.
It follows that the trial court erred in giving the general affirmative charge in favor of the state, and in refusing to give the requested general affirmative charge in favor of the defendant. Hill v. State, 93 So. 460, 207 Ala. 444; Ryan v. State, 14 So. 868, 100 Ala. 94; McCullars v. State,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hall v. State, 5 Div. 357
...some factual analogy to the case at bar, or at least contain logical deductions which influenced our original conclusion. Carr v. State, 21 Ala.App. 299, 107 So. 730; Hutto v. State, 27 Ala.App. 81, 165 So. 871; Smith v. State, 25 Ala.App. 445, 148 So. 336; Horn v. State, 23 Ala.App. 273, 1......
-
State v. Saltzman, 47625
...is no less extrajudicial because it is or may be admissible under the res gestae rule governing admissibility of evidence. Carr v. State, 21 Ala.App. 299, 107 So. 730. If the defendant's admission or confession is to be the only proof of the corpus delicti then nothing short of a judicial c......
-
Sauls v. State, 4 Div. 654.
... ... State, 107 Ala. 35, 18 So. 142; Griggs ... v. State, 58 Ala. 425, 29 Am.Rep. 762; Jeffries v ... State, 7 Ala.App. 144, 62 So. 270; Weaver v ... State, 24 Ala.App. 208, 132 So. 706; Young v ... State, 22 Ala.App. 436, 116 So. 507; Brown v ... State, 20 Ala.App. 178, 101 So. 224; Carr v ... State, 21 Ala.App. 299, 107 So. 730; Clisby v ... State, 17 Ala.App. 475, 86 So. 140; Woodward v ... State, 21 Ala.App. 417, 109 So. 119; Hasty v ... State, 20 Ala.App. 9, 100 So. 561; Findley v ... State, 128 Fla. 341, 174 So. 724 ... Reversed ... and ... ...
-
Sherman v. State
...20 Ala.App. 456, 102 So. 785; Pruitt v. State, 22 Ala.App. 113, 113 So. 316; Gann v. State, 22 Ala.App. 65, 112 So. 178; Carr v. State, 21 Ala.App. 299, 107 So. 730; Smith v. State, 36 Ala.App. 646, 62 So.2d 473; Clark v. State, Ala.App., 63 So.2d 734; Hall v. State, 36 Ala.App. 407, 58 So.......