French v. State

• Decision Date: 03 February 1892
• Citation: 94 Ala. 93,10 So. 553
• Parties: FRENCH v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

10 So. 553

94 Ala. 93

FRENCH v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

February 3, 1892

Appeal from criminal court, Pike county; WILLIAM H. PARKS, Judge.

Indictment against W. E. French for carrying a concealed weapon. Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction. Affirmed.

The appellant in this case was indicted, tried, and convicted for carrying a pistol concealed about his person. The evidence introduced by the state showed that upon the defendant's being arrested, and his person searched, as is stated in the opinion, a pistol was found concealed in his coat-pocket. The defendant duly excepted to the court's allowing the state to introduce evidence concerning the search of the defendant and the discovery of said pistol concealed about his person. Upon the introduction of all the evidence the court gave the jury the following charge: "If you believe the evidence in the case, you must find the defendant guilty;" to which charge the defendant duly excepted.

M N. Carlisle, for appellant.

Wm. L. Martin, Atty. Gen., for the State.

MCCLELLAN J.

It was admitted on the trial below that the arrest of French by the police officers of the city of Troy was a lawful arrest, the said French being in the act of violating an ordinance of the municipality, and, of consequence, that his imprisonment was legal. Under these circumstances, it was not only the right but the duty, of the officers to search the prisoner for weapons which might be used by him to effect an escape, and this wholly regardless of his resistance or peaceable submission to the arrest and confinement in the first instance. The fact that one lawfully arrested makes no attempt to use weapons he has about his person, or to otherwise resist the officers of the law, is no reason whatever for allowing him to retain such weapons, which he may afterwards, and under more favorable conditions, it may be, resort to to make good his escape. Ex parte Hurn, 92 Ala 102, 9 South. Rep. 515. The right to arrest and confine French being thus admitted, and the additional right arising from such arrest and confinement to search him and take away any arms found upon his person being, in our opinion, unquestionable, this case, in respect of the matter reserved for our consideration, is upon all fours in principle with that of Chastang v. State, 83 Ala. 29, 3 South. Rep. 304, where it is held that the fact disclosed by such a search that the person arrested had a...