Clayton v. State, 7 Div. 196
| Decision Date | 07 October 1952 |
| Docket Number | 7 Div. 196 |
| Citation | 63 So.2d 564,36 Ala.App. 610 |
| Parties | CLAYTON v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Chas. Thomason, Anniston, for appellant.
Si Garrett, Atty. Gen., Bernard F. Sykes, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Maury D. Smith, Montgomery, of counsel, for the State.
These charges were refused to defendant:
The indictment in this case charged the defendant with the offense of transporting, in quantities of five gallons or more, prohibited liquors or beverages, in violation of Title 29, Section 187 of the Code of Alabama 1940.
The evidence for the State was presented by the arresting officers. Their testimony was to the effect that their attention was attracted to appellant's automobile on the De Armanville road in Calhoun County. When pursued, defendant attempted flight, and it was necessary to puncture his tires with pistol shots to get him to stop. In searching the automobile three corrugated cardboard boxes were found in the trunk, each box containing ten half gallon jars filled with whiskey.
Defendant contended the automobile belonged to his soldier son. He testified his son was at home on furlough and had been using the automobile for a week. He disclaimed ownership of the whiskey and stated he did not know it was in the automobile.
This evidence presented a question for the jury to determine and was ample, if believed beyond a reasonable doubt, to sustain the verdict and judgment of conviction. No error resulted in the court's action in refusing the affirmative charge nor denying the motion for a new trial on the ground the verdict was contrary to the preponderance of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Shouse v. State
...denied 219 Ala. 10, 121 So. 9; Nelson v. State, 35 Ala.App. 1, 46 So.2d 231, certiorari denied 253 Ala. 666, 46 So.2d 236; Clayton v. State, Ala.App., 63 So.2d 564. To sustain the contention of the impropriety of the refusal of charge numbered 43, appellant's attorney cites Walker v. State,......
-
Hubbard v. State
...of all the evidence." Nelson v. State, 35 Ala.App. 1, 6, 46 So.2d 231, affirmed, 253 Ala. 666, 46 So.2d 236 (1949); Clayton v. State, 36 Ala.App. 610, 611, 63 So.2d 564, cert. denied, 258 Ala. 451, 63 So.2d 565 We find no fatal variance between the allegation in count two of the indictment ......
-
Alldredge v. State
...104 So. 668 (1925); Odom v. State, 253 Ala. 571, 46 So.2d 1 (1950); McDowell v. State, 238 Ala. 101, 189 So. 183 (1939); Clayton v. State, 36 Ala.App. 610, 63 So.2d 564, cert. denied, 258 Ala. 451, 63 So.2d 565 (1952); Turner v. State, 410 So.2d 458 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 410 So.2d 45......
-
Alldredge v. State
...v. State, 32 Ala.App. 420, 26 So.2d 519(14), Charge 23; Carroll v. State, 36 Ala.App. 59, 52 So.2d 171(19), Charge 14; Clayton v. State, 36 Ala.App. 610, 63 So.2d 564(3), Charge 16; Mason v. State, 37 Ala.App. 122, 64 So.2d 606(10), Charge 25; and in McDowell v. State, 238 Ala. 101, 189 So.......