Johnson v. State
Citation | 364 So.2d 1187 |
Decision Date | 03 October 1978 |
Docket Number | 6 Div. 687 |
Parties | Julius JOHNSON v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Roger C. Appell of Bryan, Wiggins, Quinn & Appell, Birmingham, for appellant.
William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen., and Milton E. Belcher, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Eddie Hardaway, Jr., Montgomery, for the State, appellee.
Robbery; sentence: ten years imprisonment.
On April 4, 1977, Ms. Nellie Jordan, an employee of the Big Apple Fruit Stand in Jefferson County, Alabama, was forced at knife point to open the cash register by a young black male. Forty dollars in cash was stolen from the register. Ms. Jordan testified that, at approximately 12:00 noon, appellant, whom she had never seen before, entered the store alone and asked for the owner, Ted Williams. Ms. Jordan, who was alone in the store, told appellant Williams was not in. Appellant made a purchase of cookies and exited the store. About 2:00 P.M. the same day, appellant returned to the store. Ms. Jordan recognized him from the noon encounter, remembering his inquiry about Mr. Williams. She also stated the store was quite small thus enabling her to view appellant closely on both visits. Appellant again made a purchase from Ms. Jordan who was still operating the store alone as she had been that morning. Appellant lingered in the store. As Ms. Jordan turned to put the money in the cash register, appellant accosted her with a knife around her neck cutting her slightly. He told her he wanted all the money, which she handed to him. He then ran out of the store and fled the scene on foot.
On April 6, 1978, two days after the robbery, both Ms. Jordan and Mr. Williams were in the store when Ms. Jordan observed appellant enter the store for a third time. As appellant made a purchase from Mr. Williams, Ms. Jordan signaled Williams that appellant was the robber. After asking Ms. Jordan "was she sure" appellant was the robber, Williams asked appellant what else he needed. Appellant responded he had to go home and get his money, at which time Williams asked appellant if he had robbed Ms. Jordan two days ago. Williams then pulled a gun from under his clothing. Appellant stated he did not rob her and suggested that Williams call the police. Because appellant offered no resistance, Williams returned the gun to his pants and called the police.
Appellant presented alibi evidence by his father and brother that he had been at home the day of the robbery watching television with his entire family. The witnesses stated they especially remembered the day because of a tornado and bad weather which kept them all home from work. Appellant testified on his own behalf as well as corroborating the alibi attested to by his father and brother.
Appellant argues the following testimony of appellant's brother was hearsay and that its admission into evidence over appellant's objection was harmful error requiring reversal. The evidence appears in the record as follows:
Appellant's objection was, "I object to all these people." Hearsay was not mentioned as a ground for objection at trial, therefore, all grounds Not specified were waived, and the trial court will not be put in error on grounds Not assigned. Slinker v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 344 So.2d 1264 (1977); Neugent v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 340 So.2d 55, cert. denied, Ala., 340 So.2d 60 (1976). Review of objections to improper admission of evidence is not available unless appropriate grounds are stated. Rogers v. State, 53 Ala.App. 573, 302 So.2d 547 (1974). Further, the substance of the testimony appears to have come into evidence without objection during redirect examination of the witness by appellant's counsel.
The objectionable material having been elicited and admitted by appellant's own counsel without objection, appellant cannot now be heard to complain of error in this matter. Pitts v. State, 291 Ala. 136, 279 So.2d 119 (1973).
Appellant asserts the admission of the following hearsay testimony was reversible error:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Brown v. State
...inquiry into the area. Van Antwerp v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 358 So.2d 782, cert. denied, Ala., 358 So.2d 791 (1978); Johnson v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 364 So.2d 1187, cert. denied, Ala., 364 So.2d 1190 (1978); authorities cited in Part VII A, supra. As to the State's questions concerning the cur......
- Cunningham v. State
-
Jelks v. State
...error in the court's ruling. Starling v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 398 So.2d 337, certiorari denied, Ala., 398 So.2d 342; Johnson v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 364 So.2d 1187, certiorari denied, Ala., 364 So.2d 1190; Slinker v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 344 So.2d The second error complained of by the appellan......
-
Beasley v. State, 8 Div. 491
...(Ala.Cr.App.1980). Review of objections to admission of evidence is not available unless appropriate grounds are stated. Johnson v. State, 364 So.2d 1187 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 364 So.2d 1190 (Ala.1978). The cigarette case was properly admitted into evidence since the State demonstrat......