Harmon v. State

• Decision Date: 21 April 1910
• Citation: 166 Ala. 28,52 So. 348
• Parties: HARMON v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

52 So. 348

166 Ala. 28

HARMON v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

April 21, 1910

Appeal from Circuit Court, Bibb County; B. M. Miller, Judge.

George F. Harmon was convicted of assault with intent to murder, and he appeals. Affirmed.

The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court. The following charges were given at the instance of the state: "(1) I charge you, gentlemen of the jury, that conspiracy may be proved by circumstantial evidence. (2) I charge you, gentlemen of the jury, that if you believe from the evidence beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant gave Stella Beck the pistol for the purpose of shooting Jack Brown, you cannot convict the defendant."

Logan Van de Graaf & Logan, for appellant.

Alexander M. Garber, Atty. Gen., for the State.

SIMPSON J.

The appellant was convicted of the crime of assault with intent to murder Jack Brown. The evidence on the part of the state showed that in the month of June, 1909, said Jack Brown, who was deputy sheriff, was at Blocton, near the pay office of the Tennessee Coal, Iron & Railroad Company; that one Stella Beck was there, attempting to collect a pay check due by said company to defendant, there being there a considerable crowd of operatives collecting their pay checks; that, said Stella Beck being disorderly at the pay widow, said Jack Brown pushed her down the steps that at that time she did not have on, nor on her arm, any coat; that, a few minutes before this time, the defendant was standing at the foot of said steps with a blue coat on his arm; that in above five minutes after she had been pushed down the steps said Stella Beck came back up the steps with a blue coat, similar to the one defendant had, on her arm, and drew a pistol, either from under the coat or from its pocket and fired it at said Jack Brown; that defendant admitted that it was his coat and his pistol which Stella had, but denied that he had given them to her. It was also shown that Stella Beck and defendant lived in the same house. At the conclusion of the state's evidence, the defendant moved the court to exclude all of the testimony, on the ground that the state had not shown prima facie that there was a conspiracy between said Stella Beck and defendant to shoot said Jack Brown with intent to murder him. A conspiracy may be proved by circumstantial evidence; and, under the evidence of the state, it was for the jury to determine whether or not the conspiracy existed.

Just after the introductory portion of the testimony of Jack Brown, the first witness, he was asked, "Did Stella Beck shoot at you that day?" to which question the defendant objected, among other reasons, because no prima facie conspiracy had been shown between Stella Beck and the defendant; but, on the statement of the solicitor that he would connect this testimony and show it to be relevant, the court overruled the objection, and, after the question was answered, the defendant moved to exclude the answer for the same reasons. It is true that neither the statements nor the acts of one supposed conspirator are admissible in evidence against the other, until the conspiracy has been proved; and Mr. Greenleaf criticises the practice of admitting them even provisionally, as was done in this case, and states that it should not be done except under particular and...