Hill v. State
| Decision Date | 04 April 1906 |
| Citation | 145 Ala. 58,40 So. 654 |
| Parties | HILL v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Morgan County; D. W. Speake, Judge.
"To be officialy reported."
Mack Hill was convicted of robbery, and he appeals. Reversed.
J. B Brown and P. M. Brindley, for appellant.
Massey Wilson, Atty. Gen., for the State.
The defendant was indicted for robbery, and the indictment avers the taking of property of Alexander Mots from the "person or possession of Lula Mots," and was subject to the demurrer interposed. The statute in this state fixes the punishment of robbery only, and we are remitted to the common law for a definition of the offense. Pretermitting the grounds of demurrer as to the averment of the ownership in one and the taking from another, the indictment was defective by reason of the alternative averment of the taking from the "person or possession" of Lula Mots. Blackstone defines robbery to be "the felonious and forcible taking from the person of another of goods or money to any value by violence or putting him in fear." And all of the authors, while departing in some respects from the language used by Mr. Blackstone, contain in their definition the same ingredients, and none of which contemplates a taking from a bare possession, but provide that the taking should be from the person.
A man might have the possession of a thing, yet it might not be upon his person, or under his direct personal control. Mr Bishop, in his work on Criminal Law , in discussing what may be deemed the "person," says: Our own court, in the case of ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Carcerano
...72 Iowa 432, 34 N.W. 194, 2 Am.St.Rep. 252; People v. Cabassa, 249 Mich. 543, 229 N.W. 442; Turner v. State, 1 Ohio St. 422; Hill v. State, 145 Ala. 58, 40 So. 654. A thing is in the presence of a person in respect to robbery, which is so within his reach, inspection, observation or control......
-
White v. State
...a taking of property of another from his person or from his presence or personal physical control or protection. Hill v. State, 145 Ala. 58, 40 So. 654 (1906); Henderson v. State, 172 Ala. 415, 55 So. 816 (1911); Rice v. State, 204 Ala. 104, 85 So. 437 (1920); Bray v. State, 47 Ala.App. 308......
-
Mitchell v. State
...or on the person of the victim. It is sufficient if the property was taken from the victim's presence or personal protection. Hill v. State, 145 Ala. 58, 40 So. 654. Other states have held similarly: "Where the property was in the control, custody, and protection of the person from whom it ......
-
Watson v. State
...carrying away of the property of another from his person or in his presence. Henderson v. State, 172 Ala. 415, 55 So. 816; Hill v. State, 145 Ala. 58, 40 So. 654; Morris v. State, 97 Ala. 82, 12 So. The victim, in the present case, testified that, a pistol was drawn on him by the appellant,......