Flott v. State, 1 Div. 40.
| Decision Date | 19 January 1932 |
| Docket Number | 1 Div. 40. |
| Citation | 139 So. 298,24 Ala.App. 584 |
| Parties | FLOTT v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Baldwin County; F. W. Hare, Judge.
Ed Flott was convicted of grand larceny, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
B. F. McMillan, Jr., and H. H. McKee, both of Mobile, for appellant.
Thos. E. Knight, Jr., Atty. Gen., and Jas. L. Screws, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Appellant was convicted of the offense of grand larceny.
The indictment was in the form prescribed by the Code, and the demurrers thereto were properly overruled. Code 1923, § 4556, part 1 of form 64; Id. § 4527; Id. § 4905; Ragan v. State, 15 Ala. App. 694, 72 So. 506.
There was no error in allowing the state to introduce testimony of statements made by appellant relative to his possession of the logs in question. Such evidence was admissible as tending to show how his possession came about. Bryant v. State, 116 Ala. 445, 23 So. 40.
There was at least a scintilla of evidence pointing to the guilt of appellant as charged-if there was not more. So the general affirmative charge to find in his favor, which he requested, was properly refused. Norwood Hospital v. Brown, 219 Ala. 445, 122 So. 411.
The other written charges requested by appellant, and refused, have each been examined. In each instance the same was either argumentative, exacted too high a degree of proof, or not predicated upon a consideration of all the evidence. Each of them was properly refused.
We discover nowhere prejudicial error, and the judgment appealed from is affirmed.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Murchison v. State
...was in form prescribed by statute. Code 1940, Title 15, Sec. 259, Form 66. It was not, therefore, subject to demurrer. Flott v. State, 24 Ala.App. 584, 139 So. 298. question of prime importance that appears of record on this appeal is whether or not the facts are sufficient upon which to ba......
-
Brown v. State
...first count. The counts of the indictment are each in code form, and the demurrers thereto were overruled without error. Flott v. State, 24 Ala.App. 584, 139 So. 298; Rogers v. State, 17 Ala.App. 175, 83 So. Preliminary to the main trial procedure, appellant's attorney challenged for cause ......
-
Ledbetter v. State, 6 Div. 33.
... ... murder and on his trial was convicted of assault and battery ... The ... insistences of error here made are: (1) That the additional ... sentence of six months at hard labor fixed by the court is ... void; (2) the examination of the physician attending the ... ...
-
Vest v. Night Commander Lighting Co., 8 Div. 359.
... ... interstate commerce, in no way affected by the public policy ... of this state ... Under ... the repeated rulings here, this involved a finding of fact by ... the ... ...