Hargrove v. State
| Decision Date | 12 April 1927 |
| Docket Number | 8 Div. 489 |
| Citation | 22 Ala.App. 67,111 So. 587 |
| Parties | HARGROVE v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Limestone County; J.E. Horton, Judge.
Willie Hargrove was convicted of assault with intent to murder, and he appeals, Affirmed.
J.G Rankin, of Athens, for appellant.
Charlie C. McCall, Atty. Gen., for the State.
The evidence in this case was in sharp conflict, thus presenting questions for determination by the jury. The first several charges refused to defendant being of an affirmative nature were properly refused, as under this evidence the court was under no duty to give said charges and was without authority to direct a verdict for the defendant.
The charge, by indictment, was assault with intent to murder, the alleged injured party being one Bernard Arnett, who was a deputy sheriff and jailer for Madison county.
The insistence of the state was that the alleged injury was inflicted upon the officer by the accused while attempting to arrest him for an offense committed in his presence--that of public drunkenness. It was admitted that the officer had no warrant in his possession for the arrest of the defendant at the time such arrest was attempted. There was some evidence tending to show that the accused was drunk, and that in that condition he appeared at or near the public jail of the county and manifested such drunken condition by loud and profane discourse, or by boisterous or indecent conduct, and the state insisted that for and on account of the commission of said offense in the presence of the officer he undertook to arrest the offender, who resisted and inflicted upon the officer the injury complained of; that he attacked him with a knife and seriously wounded him.
On the other hand, the defendant insisted that he was not drunk upon the occasion in question and that he had committed no offense in the presence of the officer, and that the officer attacked him without cause except that he had perpetrated a jest upon him just previous to the time of the attack. As stated, these contentions, as to which there was evidence to sustain each presented a question of fact for the jury to determine.
The principal insistence of error is that the court permitted the state, over the objection and exception of defendant, to prove by its witnesses that the defendant was drunk. Appellant insists that in this ruling the court allowed witness Barber to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jarvis v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co.
... ... governed by the law of Illinois and could not maintain this ... action in this State. Sec. 1233, R. S. 1919. (a) The mere ... fact that plaintiff alleged he was employed in interstate ... commerce would not prevent his amendment by ... ...
-
Gills v. State
...a witness to testify to a conclusion. Dozier v. State, 130 Ala. 57, 30 So. 396; May v. State, 167 Ala. 36, 52 So. 602; Hargrove v. State, 22 Ala.App. 67, 111 So. 587; Ballard v. State, 25 Ala.App. 457, 148 So. 752; Pierson v. State, 31 Ala.App. 452, 18 So.2d 578. Objections were interposed ......
-
Durham v. State
...31 Ala.App. 452, 18 So.2d 578; Dozier v. State, 130 Ala. 57, 30 So. 396; Wallace v. State, 16 Ala.App. 451, 78 So. 714; Hargrove v. State, 22 Ala.App. 67, 111 So. 587; Ballard v. State, 25 Ala.App. 457, 148 So. 752; May v. State, 167 Ala. 36, 52 So. No reversible error appears in any ruling......
-
Davis v. State, 8 Div. 507
... ... tending to prove that just after the accident the defendant ... was not normal; that he staggered; that he made use of ... language indicating a drunken condition; all of which ... testimony was relevant and admissible. Wallace v ... State, 16 Ala.App. 451, 78 So. 714; Hargrove v ... State, 22 Ala.App. 67, 111 So 587; Ballard v ... State, 25 Ala.App. 457, 148 So. 752 ... It is ... true that the evidence for the defendant tended to rebut this ... proof, and that, instead of being intoxicated, the defendant ... was stunned or dazed by reason of the impact ... ...