Hampton v. State

• Decision Date: 05 June 1902
• Citation: Hampton v. State, 133 Ala. 180, 32 So. 230 (Ala. 1902)
• Parties: HAMPTON v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

32 So. 230

133 Ala. 180

HAMPTON v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 5, 1902

Appeal from Morgan countycourt; Wm. E. Skeggs, Judge.

Calvin Hampton was convicted of carrying concealed weapons, and he appeals.Reversed.

The complaint under which defendant was convicted charged "that within twelve months before the filing of this complaint, Calvin Hampton carried concealed about his peurson a pestol which said offense has been committed in said county against the peace and dignity of the State of Alabama."To this complaint or affidavit the defendant demurred upon the ground that it did not charge the commission of any offense, but avers that the defendant"carried concealed about his peurson a pestol," and that the averments of said affidavit were uncertain and insufficient.This demurrer was overruled.Under the opinion on the present appeal, it is unnecessary to set out the facts in detail.The court, at the request of the state, gave to the jury the following charge "If the jury believe the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, they will find the defendant guilty as charged in the complaint."The defendant duly excepted to the court's refusal to give this charge, and also separately excepted to the court's refusal to give the following written charges requested by him: "(1) If you do not believe the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, you are not required to find the defendant guilty.(2) If you are satisfied from the evidence that the defendant was carrying the pistol in such a manner that it was observable by ordinary observation, you should find the defendant not guilty."After the judgment of conviction rendered upon the verdict of the jury, the defendant made a motion in arrest of judgment.This motion does not appear as part of the record, and it does not appear to have been made until after the sentence of the court had been passed upon the defendant.

Where on a prosecution for carrying concealed weapons, the fact that defendant had the weapon on his person was not in dispute, but it was disputed whether it was concealed, it was error to give the general affirmative charge, with hypothesis, for the state.

Russell & Lynne, for appellant.

Chas G. Brown, Atty. Gen., for the State.

TYSON J.

The complaint upon which defendant was tried is not before us.The copy of it in the transcript does not show clearly how the word "person" was spelled,--whether "peurson" or "purson."But it is of no consequence whether the one or the other, since it is simply a clerical or grammatical error.It is impossible to read the complaint and be in doubt as to the word intended, or its import.The same may be said of...