Crenshaw v. State

Citation93 So. 465,207 Ala. 438
Decision Date04 May 1922
Docket Number3 Div. 513.
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

93 So. 465

207 Ala. 438


3 Div. 513.

Supreme Court of Alabama

May 4, 1922

Appeal from Circuit Court, Butler County; A. E. Gamble, Judge.

Jake Crenshaw was convicted of murder in the first degree, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.

Beddow & Oberdorfer and Roderick Beddow, all of Birmingham, for appellant.

Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., and Lamar Field, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.


Appellant was convicted of the murder of Mrs. Laura Gafford, and his punishment fixed at death.

This is the second appeal in this cause. Crenshaw v. State, 205 Ala. 256, 87 So. 328. Upon the former appeal it was held that the trial court will not be reversed in holding that Camie Cheatham, a negro girl 6 or 8 years of age, was competent to testify, in view of her voir dire examination. The court is of the opinion that the testimony upon this question is not so materially different upon this appeal as to justify a contrary conclusion. This observation applies also to the admissibility of statements alleged to have been made to Officers Tyler and Robins, and the decision upon the former appeal determines that question likewise adversely to appellant's contention.

The affidavits offered by the state and defendant upon the hearing of the motion for a change of venue have been examined. A discussion thereof would serve no useful purpose, as the conclusion has been reached by the court that reversible error was not shown in overruling this motion. Godau v. State, 179 Ala. 27, 60 So. 908; Adams v. State, 181 Ala. 58, 61 So. 352; McClain v. State, 182 Ala. 67, 62 So. 241.

The deceased was killed on Sunday, May 16, 1920, some time after 2 p. m., at her residence on a plantation in Butler county. She was more than 50 years of age. The defendant is a negro, and at the time of the commission of this offense was about 18 years of age. The evidence against him-aside from certain statements, some of which are above referred to-was purely circumstantial. The most damaging proof against defendant was that furnished by the evidence of the negro girl, Camie Cheatham, whose competency as a witness was under discussion upon the former appeal. The defendant left Greenville for Birmingham on the early morning train of Monday, following the murder of Mrs. Gafford on the Sunday afternoon preceding. As noted upon the former appeal, the evidence of the prosecution relating to this circumstance bore the implication of flight, and it was upon the admissibility of evidence in explanation thereof that a reversal of the cause was rested. The defendant went to the home of his sister at Edgewater, near Birmingham, and obtained a job in the mines where he had previously worked. He was arrested while in bed at the home of his sister, and carried by two officers for incarceration in the Birmingham jail.

The evidence for the state was to the effect that at the time of the killing the defendant wore a brown suit of clothes and tan shoes. These were offered in evidence, and admitted by the defendant as his clothing and shoes, and worn by him on the Sunday of Mrs. Gafford's murder. The officers, on their way to Birmingham with the defendant, upon reaching Wylam, stopped at a pressing shop and got a pair of blue serge trousers belonging to the defendant. These [93 So. 466] trousers showed a torn place on the right knee, and defendant's knee...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Burns v. State, 6 Div. 965.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • October 6, 1932
    ...... v. Webster, 213 Ala. 99, 104 So. 25; Owens v. State, 215 Ala. 42, 109 So. 109; Birmingham Railway,. Light & Power Co. v. Gonzalez, 183 Ala. 273, 287, 61 So. 80, Ann. Cas. 1916A, 543; Carter v. State, 219 Ala. 670, 123 So. 50; Clinton Mining Co. v. Bradford, 200. Ala. 308, 76 So. 74; Crenshaw v. State, 207 Ala. 438, 93 So. 465; Anderson v. State, 209 Ala. 36, 44,. 95 So. 171, and authorities; Tennessee River Nav. Co. v. Walls, 209 Ala. 320, 96 So. 266; Davis v. State, 209 Ala. 409, 96 So. 187; Hanye v. State, 211 Ala. 555, 101 So. 108; Metropolitan Life. Ins. Co. v. Carter, 212 ......
  • Daniels v. State, 1 Div. 162.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • January 21, 1943
    ...... significant stains on defendant's clothing tended to show. the recent sexual intercourse, and the more specific stains. and soiled places on the front of defendant's pants and. those from the knees down were to like effect. 22 C.J.S.,. Criminal Law, p. 1216, § 713; Crenshaw v. State, 207. Ala. 438, 93 So. 465; 16 C.J. p. 620, § 1227. . . The. articles of wearing apparel were properly identified by the. evidence. Pate v. State, 150 Ala. 10, 43 So. 343. . . There. is an assignment of error based upon the ruling of the trial. court in this: ......
  • Baker v. State
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • February 10, 1923
    ...and not when the former application was made and heard before the former trial. Hawes v. State, 88 Ala. 37, 7 So. 302; Crenshaw v. State, 207 Ala. 438, 93 So. 465. Cox was killed December 25, 1921. The indictment against the defendant for the alleged offense was returned into court February......
  • Gholston v. State, 8 Div. 193.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • June 5, 1930
    ...v. State, 203 Ala. 99, 82 So. 113; Husch v. State, 211 Ala. 274, 100 So. 321; Boyette v. State, 215 Ala. 472, 100 So. 812; Crenshaw v. State, 207 Ala. 438, 93 So. 465; Puckett v. State, 213 Ala. 383, 105 So. Defendant testified fully that he did not kill deceased, that he threw down the hom......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT