Dunning v. State

Decision Date06 April 1926
Docket Number2 Div. 366
Citation108 So. 82,21 Ala.App. 318
PartiesDUNNING v. STATE.
CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

Appeal from Circuit Court, Marengo County; John McKinley, Judge.

Mathew Dunning was convicted of violating the prohibition laws, and he appeals. Affirmed.

I.I Canterbury, of Linden, for appellant.

Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., and Thos. E. Knight, Jr., Asst. Atty Gen., for the State.

RICE J.

The indictment charges that Mathews Dunning unlawfully possessed a still and did make or manufacture prohibited liquors. Defendant demurred to the indictment, and interposed a plea of not guilty. The state offered only one witness, the arresting officer; the defendant offered no witnesses. The state's witness testified that he had known defendant twenty odd years; that he guessed he had known Mathew that long. Thereupon the witness was asked by defendant's attorney if he knew defendant as Mathew Dunning, and if defendant went by the name of Mathews Dunning. The witness replied that he had heard him called Mathew. Defendant then objected to any testimony as to Mathew Dunning, which objection being overruled, defendant sought leave to withdraw his plea of not guilty and demurrer and to be allowed to file a plea of misnomer. The court declined to permit this, and defendant objected. In this there was no error. By pleading in bar--not guilty--defendant waived his right to plead in abatement. Jones v. State, 61 So. 434, 181 Ala. 63; Whitehead v. State, 90 So. 351, 206 Ala. 288; Smith v. State, 39 So. 329, 142 Ala. 14. The trial court might, within its discretion, have permitted the defendant to withdraw plea in bar and to file a plea of misnomer, but in failing to do so there was no abuse of discretion. Whitehead v. State, supra. Defendant requested affirmative charges and also requested a charge (3) to the effect that, unless the jury believed beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant's name was Mathews Dunning, they could not find him guilty. The alleged misnomer did not create a variance available under the general charge. Jones v. State, supra. A request for instruction cannot be made to take the place of a plea of misnomer. McBride v State, 98 So. 135, 19 Ala.App. 471.

Where the oral charge of the court is not in the record, it will be presumed that refused charges other than the affirmative charge, where they state correct propositions of law, were covered by the court's oral charge. McBride v. State, 102...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Holloway v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • 2 Diciembre 1952
    ...of the plea to the merits addressed itself to the sound discretion of the trial judge. Whitehead v. State, supra; Dunning v. State, 21 Ala.App. 318, 108 So. 82. We take the view that the action of the court in entertaining the demurrers to the pleas and entering a judgment indicating his ru......
  • Higginbotham v. State, 7 Div. 246
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 10 Marzo 1955
    ...of not guilty waives right of accused to plead in abatement for misnomer. Nettles v. State, 222 Ala. 236, 132 So. 41; Dunning v. State, 21 Ala.App. 318, 108 So. 82. There was no error in sustaining the State's challenge of the juror Breitstein, who had stated to the court that he would not ......
  • Patton v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • 27 Febrero 1940
    ... ... question as to whether the defendant was correctly named is ... not presented here, as same cannot be raised by demurrer to ... the indictment, but must be raised by a plea in abatement, ... stating his true name. Morningstar v. State, 52 Ala ... 405; Gerrish v. State, 53 Ala. 476; Dunning v ... State, 21 Ala.App. 318, 108 So. 82 ... The ... question raised by the defendant in his demurrer to the ... indictment is whether or not the omission of the word ... "otherwise" from the indictment renders it invalid ... We think it evident that it does not. Section 4537 of ... ...
  • Jones v. Morrow
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • 6 Abril 1926
    ... ... here involved, the case of Stedham's Heirs v ... Stedham's Ex'r, 32 Ala. 525, will indicate the ... view taken by the courts of this state on the question of ... waiver of jury trials ... We find ... no error in the record, and the judgment is affirmed ... ...
  • 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