Hyde v. State
| Decision Date | 28 February 1935 |
| Docket Number | 8 Div. 602 |
| Citation | 230 Ala. 243,160 So. 237 |
| Parties | HYDE v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Rehearing Denied April 4, 1935
Appeal from Circuit Court, Limestone County; W.W. Callahan, Judge.
Bill Hyde was convicted of murder in the second degree, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
Wall & Creel, of Athens, for appellant.
A.A Carmichael, Atty. Gen., for the State.
The appeal is from a conviction of murder in the second degree with punishment fixed at imprisonment for a period of 25 years.
On the morning of March 27th, last, three young ladies were traveling in an Austin coupé from Decatur to Athens, Ala., on the "Bee Line Highway." Their car was struck in the rear by a 1925 model Maxwell coupé, driven by this defendant, resulting in its complete reversal and overthrow, and fell upon its left side. The Austin ignited, and two of the young ladies died as a result of burns received in the wreck.
The defendant and his companion, Cox (jointly indicted with him, but for whom the affirmative charge was given), proceeded on their way until their car broke down and ran into a ditch between Athens and Elkmont, where the arrest was made. Both of the young men were under the influence of intoxicants, though defendant insists he remembered most everything that happened.
On motion for a new trial (denial of which constitutes the major point here pressed for reversal), the trial judge wrote an opinion, in which, beginning on page 6-c of the transcript, he summarizes the salient features of the evidence and the reasonable conclusion deducible therefrom. This excerpt from his opinion appears in the report of the case, and need not be here repeated. Suffice it to say our study of the proof confirms this summary, and we accord with the conclusion that the proof was sufficient for submission to the jury of the question of defendant's guilt of murder in the second degree. Reed v. State, 25 Ala.App. 18, 142 So. 441, certiorari denied Reed v. State, 225 Ala. 219, 142 So. 442.
The trial court saw and heard the witnesses, and denied the new trial. The established rule is that his decision will not be here overturned, unless, after allowing all reasonable presumptions of its correctness, the preponderance of the evidence against the verdict is so decided as to clearly convince us that it is wrong and unjust. Cobb v. Malone, 92 Ala. 630, 9 So. 738.
A discussion of the facts would serve no useful...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jolly v. State
...a homicide committed by an intoxicated driver of an automobile may constitute murder in the second degree. Hyde v. State, 230 Ala. 243, 160 So. 237 (1935); Langford v. State, 354 So.2d 297 (Ala.Cr.App.), reversed, 354 So.2d 313 (Ala.1977); McGhee v. State, 333 So.2d 865 (Ala.Cr.App.1976); W......
-
Commander v. State
...a homicide committed by an intoxicated driver of an automobile may constitute murder in the second degree. Hyde v. State, 230 Ala. 243, 160 So. 237 (1935); Langford v. State, 354 So.2d 297 (Ala.Cr.App.), reversed, 354 So.2d 313 (Ala.1977); McGhee v. State, 333 So.2d 865 (Ala.Cr.App.1976); W......
-
Whitt v. State, 8 Div. 43
...may be inferred therefrom. Reed v. State, 25 Ala.App. 18, 142 So. 441; Williams v. State, 30 Ala.App. 437, 7 So.2d 511; Hyde v. State, 230 Ala. 243, 160 So. 237." This statement was quoted with approval by the Court of Appeals in Wright v. State, 41 Ala.App. 684, 149 So.2d 835 (1963). As re......
-
Baker v. State (In re Baker.)
...a fatal car wreck has been considered a significant, if not controlling, factor in a prosecution for reckless murder); Hyde v. State, 230 Ala. 243, 160 So. 237 (1935). Cf. Gwin v. State, 425 So.2d 500 (Ala.Crim.App.1982) (holding that the trial court did not err in refusing to require the S......