Green v. State, 6 Div. 639.
| Decision Date | 15 June 1948 |
| Docket Number | 6 Div. 639. |
| Citation | 36 So.2d 601,34 Ala.App. 66 |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
| Parties | GREEN v. STATE. |
Rehearing Stricken Aug. 3, 1948.
Thos Seay, of Marion, for appellant.
A A. Carmichael, Atty. Gen., and Bernard F. Sykes, Asst. Atty Gen., for the State.
The indictment in this case charged the defendant (appellant) with the offense of burglary of the inhabited dwelling house of Dalton Glover, which at the time was inhabited by Mrs Dalton Glover, a person lodged therein. Said indictment was proper in form and substance. (Burglary in the first degree).
The accused interposed his plea of not guilty. The trial in the lower court resulted in the conviction of the defendant; the verdict of the jury being, 'We the jury find the defendant guilty of burglary in the first degree as charged in the indictment, and fix his punishment at 15 years imprisonment in the penitentiary.' Judgment of conviction was duly pronounced and entered, from which this appeal was taken.
The record discloses, as to that, all the proceedings were regular. No question to the contrary is presented.
It appears there was no dispute or conflict in the evidence as to the fact that the crime was committed by some person. The defendant, however, strenuously insisted that he was not the person who committed the offense, and on this issue the evidence was in sharp conflict, therefore for the jury to consider and determine.
As stated, the corpus delicti was proved by the evidence in its every detail. This authorized the introduction in evidence the confessions of the defendant after full, thorough and proper predicates had been laid. The evidence tends to show that the defendant not only confessed to the officers of the law, who testified in this case, but also, to the named injured party, Mrs. Dalton Glover, and to her, when he was carried to the burglarized dwelling house, he pointed out how he entered the building, and the place from which he stole the radio, and in another room, where he found and got the money, that was also stolen from the dwelling at the time he committed the burglary. In this connection able and earnest counsel for the appellant insists that he was threatened by the officers, and was coerced by them into making the confession. The defendant so testified, but as stated, each of the officers, and Mrs. Glover also, testified to the fact that his confessions were voluntary in every way, as shown by the predicates above referred to. This controverted, and highly important, and conclusive question was for the jury.
Pending the trial of this case in the court below, numerous exceptions were reserved to the rulings of the court upon the admission and rejection of the evidence, and upon other matters. With commendable assiduity, counsel for appellant have incorporated each of these insistences as grounds upon which defendant's motion for a new trial is predicated. We have carefully considered every ground of the motion. It would serve no good purpose to discuss these numerous questions in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Vaughn v. State, 7 Div. 952.
-
Edwards v. State, 1 Div. 326
...and therefore inadmissible, are for the trial judge, and weight and credit to be given to confession are for the jury. Green v. State, 34 Ala.App. 66, 36 So.2d 601; Burchfield v. State, 23 Ala.App. 231, 123 So. The trial court as appears on page 469 of the transcript charged the jury on the......
-
Hardy v. State, 6 Div. 597
...of itself to acquaint appellant with the crime charged, as well as with what he must be prepared to defend against. Green v. State, 34 Ala.App. 66, 36 So.2d 601 (1948); Hamilton v. State, 283 Ala. 540, 219 So.2d 369 Appellant contends the trial court erred in denying his pretrial motion for......