McNutt v. State, 8 Div. 450.
| Decision Date | 22 March 1932 |
| Docket Number | 8 Div. 450. |
| Citation | 25 Ala.App. 129,142 So. 773 |
| Parties | MCNUTT v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Rehearing Denied May 10, 1932.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Morgan County; W. W. Callahan, Judge.
Oliver McNutt was convicted of assault and battery, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
Certiorari denied by Supreme Court in McNutt v. State, 142 So 774.
Seybourn Lynne, of Decatur, for appellant.
Thos E. Knight, Jr., Atty. Gen., and Wade Wright, of Decatur, for the State.
The indictment charged this appellant with the offense of assault with intent to murder one Elbert Brown. The trial resulted in his conviction of an assault and battery, which offense was included in the major charge. The evidence was in sharp conflict and, as the trial resulted in a conviction of the accused for a misdemeanor, all questions pertaining to the felony charge only may be pretermitted.
Several exceptions were reserved to the court's rulings upon the testimony, but upon examination and consideration of the points of decision in this connection we discover no error in any ruling of the court calculated to injuriously affect the substantial rights of the accused. We are of the opinion that the evidence was amply sufficient to sustain the verdict of the jury and the judgment of conviction pronounced and entered. From the recitations in the record and the evidence adduced upon the motion for a new trial, the court committed no error in overruling this motion. In the first place, the conviction of this appellant was for a misdemeanor only, as stated; therefore, the rules of practice governing the trial of misdemeanors prevailed, and these rules differ in many respects to the rules applicable to trials in felony cases.
Furthermore, a person on trial will not be allowed by his own voluntary act to produce a situation or condition and then undertake to avail himself of the effects of his own wrongdoing. This court will not place the trial court in error for the matter complained of in the motion for a new trial. There is merit, we think, in the insistence of the state wherein it is urged: "If it is to be held that while the court's attention is engrossed in delivering its oral charge to the jury, that a defendant on bail can step into an adjoining room for a second and come back in the court room and take his seat and wait until a jury finds adversely against him and then raise the point that his constitutional...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Blevins v. State
...to a witness; in Jackson v. State, 38 Ala.App. 114, 78 So.2d 665, as to additional instructions to the jury, and in McNutt v. State, 25 Ala.App. 129, 142 So. 773, as to the oral charge of the court. As stated in '. . . Further, the petitioner having voluntarily absented himself, he is in no......
-
Behel v. State, 8
...and voluntary waiver of the constitutional right, personal to the defendant, is consistent with the holding in McNutt v. State, 25 Ala.App. 129, 142 So. 773." See also, Dixon v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 357 So.2d In the present case, the record clearly shows that the appellant's absence from cou......
-
Berness v. State
...and voluntary waiver of the constitutional right, personal to the defendant, is consistent with the holding in McNutt v. State, 25 Ala.App. 129, 142 So. 773, certiorari denied 225 Ala. 282, 142 So. Let us now bring these general principles to bear on the instant case. As was pointed out by ......
-
Ex parte Burton
...and voluntary waiver of the constitutional right, personal to the defendant, is consistent with the holding in McNutt v. State, 25 Ala.App. 129, 142 So. 773 [ (1932) ], certiorari denied, 225 Ala. 282, 142 So. 774 [ (1932) Berness v. State, 263 Ala. at 645, 83 So.2d at 617. In Ex parte Stou......