Moore v. State

• Citation: 40 So. 345,146 Ala. 687
• Parties: MOORE v. STATE.
• Decision Date: 17 February 1906
• Court: Supreme Court of Alabama

40 So. 345

146 Ala. 687

MOORE v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

February 17, 1906

Appeal from Circuit Court, Tallapoosa County; A. H. Alston, Judge.

"Not officially reported."

George Moore was convicted of crime, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Two witnesses testified that the deceased, before he died, said to them that he was shot and knew he was going to die. Whereupon declarations as to who shot him, made by him after he had said to the two witnesses that he was going to die were admitted over the objection of the defendant. The defendant requested several written charges, which were refused, as follows: "(3) If the jury believe from all the evidence in this case that Jim Smith went into the veranda of the house and tapped on the door with his hand in a peaceful, quiet manner, and called Charles Harris, and asked him for a match with which to light his pipe, and while standing there, Charles Harris opened the door and poked his gun out and shot Mr. Smith down, and ran out into the yard and came in contact with Mr. Moore, and that they scuffled around over the negro's gun, and that Mr. Moore got the gun and the negro ran off, and that Moore did not have any firearms, and that Moore did not shoot the negro and that there was no conspiracy between Moore and any one else to kill the negro, then the defendant would not be guilty, and the jury will return a verdict of not guilty. * * * (5) In this case the burden of proof is upon the state to make out the case as charged in the indictment, and if the state has failed to make out the case as charged then the defendant would not be guilty and the jury will return a verdict of not guilty. (6) The burden of proof in this case is upon the state to prove every fact necessary to make out the case as charged beyond all reasonable doubt, and if the state has failed to prove every fact necessary to make out the case, then the defendant would not be guilty and the jury will return a verdict of not guilty. (7) If any member of the jury have a reasonable doubt of the negro Charles Harris being shot by George Moore, or that George Moore entered into a conspiracy to kill the negro, then the jury will not return of guilty against the defendant. (8) To make out the offense of conspiracy in this case the state is required to prove that the defendant, before the killing, express or implied entered into an agreement with one or more persons to kill the negro. * * * (9 1/2) To make out the offense of conspiracy in this case the state is required to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant before the killing entered into an agreement with one or more persons to take the life of the deceased. (10) If the jury believe from all the evidence in this case that the state has failed to prove a conspiracy with which the defendant was connected and has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant shot the deceased, then the defendant would not be guilty, and the jury will return a verdict of not guilty." (11) General affirmative charge.

Thomas L. Bulger, for appellant.

Massey Wilson, Atty. Gen., for the State.

DOWDELL J.

The appellant was indicted jointly with two others, viz., William Brown and Warren Fuller for the murder of one Charles Harris. The appellant alone was on trial. In selecting the jury for his trial, the name of S.W. Anthony, one of the jurors, was regularly drawn, and who, being questioned by the court on his voir dire, was found to be qualified, and was accepted by the state and the defendant as a juror; but before being sworn as a juror for the trial of the case, it was discovered...