Johnson v. State
Decision Date | 14 October 1986 |
Docket Number | 6 Div. 53 |
Parties | Larry John JOHNSON v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Thomas B. Hanes and Daniel D. Sparks of Hanes & Cotton, Birmingham, for appellant.
Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and Cecil G. Brendle, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Larry John Johnson was convicted of manslaughter in the death of Nancy Nails and sentenced to life imprisonment as a habitual offender.
On appeal, Johnson argues that the trial judge erred in refusing requested charges 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 dealing with circumstantial evidence, inferences, deductions, and the burden of proof.
The charges requested by the defendant were:
The substance of requested charges numbers 3, 6, and 7 were fairly and substantially covered in that portion of the trial judge's oral charge to the jury where he stated that Wabbington v. State, 446 So.2d 665, 669-70 (Ala.Cr.App.1983), cert. denied, Wabbington v. Alabama, 467 U.S. 1254, 104 S.Ct. 3542, 82 L.Ed.2d 846 (1984). Tyson v. State, 361 So.2d 1182, 1188 (Ala.Cr.App.1978).
The trial judge charged the jury on these principles immediately before the attorneys' closing arguments to the jury. Generally, a judge should not give undue prominence in his oral instructions to any aspect of the case. Ray v. State, 248 Ala. 425, 429, 27 So.2d 872 (1946). Here, the separate charge worked to the defendant's benefit, emphasizing for the jury his basic rights.
Requested charge number 3 was also properly refused because of its use of the term "all reasonable doubt." Ex parte Chavers, 361 So.2d 1106, 1108-09 (Ala.1978).
The court's oral charge did not cover the substance of requested charges numbers 4 and 5. These charges contain correct propositions of law. Ex parte Williams, 468 So.2d 99, 101 (Ala.1985), quoting from...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Freeman v. State
...and did not effect the appellant's substantial rights. Rule 45, Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure. See also Johnson v. State, 497 So.2d 600, 601-02 (Ala.Cr.App.1986). VII The appellant argues that the trial court's statement to the jury, that capital murder would involve the intentional ......
-
Morrison v. State
...requested charges do not call for a consideration of all the evidence," the requested charges are properly refused. Johnson v. State, 497 So.2d 600, 602 (Ala.Cr.App.1986), quoted in Henry v. State, 555 So.2d 768, 771 (Ala.Cr.App.1989). See also Houston v. State, 208 Ala. at 663, 95 So. at 1......
-
Rankin v. State, 1 Div. 415
...and substantially covered in the trial court's oral charge.' Tyson v. State, 361 So.2d 1182, 1188 (Ala.Cr.App.1978)." Johnson v. State, 497 So.2d 600, 602 (Ala.Cr.App.1986). Furthermore, the trial court correctly instructed that the burden of proof is not on the defendant to prove self-defe......
-
Henry v. State
...from circumstantial evidence and where the requested charges do not call for a consideration of all the evidence." Johnson v. State, 497 So.2d 600, 602 (Ala.Cr.App.1986); Johnson v. State, 55 Ala.App. 581, 588, 317 So.2d 548 (1975) (emphasis supplied). As requested charge No. 12 failed to c......