Luster v. State
Decision Date | 08 April 1969 |
Docket Number | 6 Div. 358 |
Citation | 221 So.2d 695,45 Ala.App. 19 |
Parties | Grady Lee LUSTER v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Chas. Tartar, of Tartar & Wininger, Birmingham, for appellant.
MacDonald Gallion, Atty.Gen., and Walter S. Turner, Asst. Atty. Gen. for the State.
Appellant was charged by complaint with the offense of indecent exposure. He interposed pleas of not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity. The jury returned a verdict of guilty and appellant was sentenced to twelve months hard labor for the County.
Appellant alleges error in the failure of the trial judge to grant his motion for new trial insisting in brief that the State failed to meet the burden of proving that the act of appellant in exposing himself was willfully and intentionally done and that the verdict of the jury was contrary to the evidence.
Appellant's main contention is that the proof of insanity was so clear, strong and undisputed that the trial judge should have granted his motion for a new trial. The affirmative charge with hypothesis was not requested.
The State called as its only witness a young girl approximately fourteen years of age at the time of the alleged offense. Her testimony in summary was that at about 12:45 P.M. in the early part of July, 1966, she was walking on the edge of "someone's" yard along Cloudland Drive, a street in Bluff Park on top of Shades Mountain, in Jefferson County, Alabama, about one block from her house, when she noticed a light blue pick-up truck approaching. The truck stopped about two feet from the girl and the appellant, inside the truck with his window down, exposed his genitals to her and uttered certain vulgar words not necessary here to elaborate. The entire incident took about ten seconds and appellant drove away. The appellant made no threatening motions toward her other than those already mentioned. After appellant drove away, the girl ran to a house across the street and wrote the tag number of the truck on a piece of paper and then called the sheriff.
The defense called ten witnesses who testified that the appellant's general reputation in the community in which he lived or worked was good.
Dr. Mallory Forbes Miree, a Birmingham Psychiatrist, was called as a defense witness and testified that appellant came to see him professionally on July 25, 1966, and complained of a compulsion to expose himself. We think it here pertinent to note that this was subsequent to July 7, 1966, the date on which the complaint was made in this cause. Dr. Miree related to the jury a history which was taken from appellant and we set out certain portions thereof as follows:
Dr. Miree's testimony continues on matters of treatment, diagnosis and prognosis as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Flenory v. State
...791, cert. denied, 281 Ala. 716, 198 So.2d 798, cert. denied, 389 U.S. 877, 88 S.Ct. 175, 19 L.Ed.2d 165 (1967); Luster v. State, 45 Ala.App. 19, 221 So.2d 695 (1969); Bowen v. State, 386 So.2d 489 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 386 So.2d 492 (Ala.1980); Breen v. State, 53 Ala.App. 588, 302 S......
-
Breen v. State, 1 Div. 453
...such evidence in toto. Hockenberry v. State, 246 Ala. 369, 20 So.2d 533; Carr v. State, 43 Ala.App. 642, 198 So.2d 791; Luster v. State, 45 Ala.App. 19, 221 So.2d 695. There was no error in admitting the testimony of the arresting officer that within thirty minutes after the killing appella......
-
Hafley v. State, 7 Div. 458
...It is within the province of the jury to reject such evidence in toto. Carr v. State, 43 Ala.App. 642, 198 So.2d 791; Luster v. State, 45 Ala.App. 19, 221 So.2d 695; Hockenberry v. State, During the Court's oral charge to the jury he made the following comment: 'I notice one case, I believe......
-
Goldsmith v. State
...such expert testimony. Hockenberry v. State, 246 Ala. 369, 20 So.2d 533; Carr v. State, 43 Ala.App. 642, 198 So.2d 791; Luster v. State, 45 Ala.App. 19, 221 So.2d 695; George v. State, 240 Ala. 632, 200 So. 602; Cunningham v. State, 47 Ala.App. 730, 261 So.2d After considering all the evide......