Jacobs v. State
| Decision Date | 19 May 1906 |
| Parties | JACOBS v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from City Court of Talladega; G. K. Miller, Judge.
"To be officially reported."
Tom Jacobs was convicted of an assault with intent to murder, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.
Prosecutor testified that he left town about a certain time to go to the house of one Hattie Breadlove, where he had an appointment and he was permitted to testify that he did not stop before he got to the house.
Defendant filed a motion for a change of venue on the following grounds: (1) That the defendant is a negro and a member of the negro race, and that the person alleged to have been assaulted is a young white man who has lived in the city of Talladega practically all of his life; a member of an influential family, and has a great many relatives who are influential citizens in the city and county of Talladega that the difficulty occurred on the night of March 28th, at the home of a negro woman; that soon after the difficulty, it was generally reported that Hubbard was seriously injured and much more so than he in fact was, and numerous threats were made by various persons in the city and county of Talladega against the defendant by white men and a great many stated openly, and especially the young men in the city, that this defendant ought to be hung and that Hubbard ought to have shot this defendant or killed him; that a great deal of prejudice was engendered in the county of Talladega against this defendant; that a day or two after the assault, or the next night, an effort was made to organize a mob in the city of Talladega for the purpose of lynching or hanging this defendant, and that the solicitor had stated that he had stayed up very late the night after the assault talking to a number of young men in the city of Talladega to prevent them from mobbing this defendant or of hunting him up to kill him that such inflamed condition of the public mind and prejudice against this defendant still exists, and there has been a great deal of discussion in regard to the cause, and a great deal of abuse of this defendant until it is impossible for this defendant to obtain in Talladega a fair and impartial trial by an unbiased and unprejudiced jury. (2) Defendant states that at the time of the commission of this offense the grand jury of this court was not in session, but had held two previous sessions and on or about March 11, 1905, had been adjourned until May 22d, unless sooner called; and that the city court of Talladega was engaged in the trial of jury cases on its regular jury call for the trial of criminal cases until the 7th day of April, 1905, about three weeks that no petit jurors for the week of this honorable court beginning on April 10, 1905, had been drawn by the jury commissioners of the county; that in some manner, said grand jury reconvened on the 7th day of April, 1905, and on the same day returned the indictment into this court charging defendant with assault with intent to murder said Howard Hubbard, the defendant being in jail under said charge, said indictment being returned during the afternoon on said day about 4 o'clock, and defendant's attorneys were notified by the clerk of this court by telephone that defendant would be arraigned on the next Monday afternoon. The defendant says that said grand jury was reconvened at such time for the purpose of investigating the charges against him, and on information, which he believes to be true, that it was so ordered to be reconvened at the request of counsel employed to prosecute this defendant or of the solicitor of this court who was requested to ask the court to do so by counsel employed to prosecute; that petit jurors for the next week were ordered by the judge mainly for the purpose of trying this case; that fear had been expressed that this defendant would be lynched was given as a reason for these hasty proceedings, and defendant avers that the prejudice so existing against him still exists, and that Hubbard and his friend have been actively engaged in talking as to this defendant and in spreading and creating such prejudice against him that it is impossible for him to obtain a fair and impartial trial. (3) That nearly all of the jurors summoned as petit jurors of this court for the week beginning Monday, April 10th, are residents of beat 5 in Talladega county, Ala., the beat in which said city of Talladega is located, a number of them living in said city, and many of them close and intimate friends of the family and relatives of said Hubbard, and it is averred on information which is believed to be true that some of the jurors summoned have expressed opinions against this defendant, and while the defendant was confined in jail had stated that if he was released they would head a mob against him. The solicitor demurred to the application for change of venue because no sufficient reason was set out therein for granting a change of venue; and no sufficient reason is shown why defendant cannot have a fair and impartial trial in said county; and the facts are not sufficiently stated to show that defendant cannot have a fair and impartial trial in said county; and the statements contained therein are not stated...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Haney v. State
...their injuries was proper subject of inquiry as being material to the issue of whether or not there was an intent to kill. Jacobs v. State, 146 Ala. 103, 42 So. 70; Brown v. State, 142 Ala. 287, 38 So. 268; v. State, 160 Ala. 102, 49 So. 786. Exceptions were reserved to the rulings of the c......
-
Pitts v. State
... ... "She didn't seem to realize anything about it; she ... did not seem to know anything about it." He further ... testified that she was in good health before she left home ... Under ordinary circumstances this testimony might have been ... admissible. Jacobs v. State, 146 Ala. 103, 42 So ... 70. In the Jacobs Case it was held that a witness was ... competent to testify as to the condition in which prosecutor ... was found shortly after the assault, though the witness was ... not an expert. In May v. State, 167 Ala. 36, 52 So ... 602, it was held ... ...
-
Hodges v. State
...contention cannot be sustained as our courts have consistently allowed such testimony by one not shown to be an expert. Jacobs v. State, 146 Ala. 103, 42 So. 70; Pitts v. State, 19 Ala.App. 564, 99 So. 61; Haney v. State, 20 Ala.App. 236, 101 So. 533; Bone v. State, 25 Ala.App. 96, 142 So. ......
-
Wilder v. Bush
...691; Bartlett v. Lang, 2 Ala. 161. As we have observed, the court retains control of its journals throughout the term. Jacobs v. State, 146 Ala. 103, 108, 42 So. 70. clerk should write the judgments from the bench notes and the pleadings in each cause. These entries are, in a general sense,......