Nuckols v. State

Decision Date06 February 1896
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Appeal from circuit court, Madison county; H. C. Speake, Judge.

Robert Nuckols was convicted of gaming, and appeals. Reversed.

The appellant in this case was indicted and tried for a violation of section 4057 of the Code, prohibiting gaming at certain places, and on the trial a verdict was rendered as follows "We, the jury, find the defendant guilty." Upon this verdict judgment was rendered by the court, sentencing the appellant to pay a fine of $50 and costs of the prosecution. The facts pertaining to the rulings of the trial court which are reviewed on the present appeal are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Shelby & Pleasants and Grayson & Foster, for appellant.

W. C Fitts, Atty. Gen., for the State.


The issue in this case was whether the defendant, within a year before indictment, played at a game with cards or dice, or some device or substitute for cards or dice, at a place within the statute, and bet or hazarded money or bank notes or other thing of value, at said game. If the house of the witness Dock Salling was such a place, it was wholly irrelevant to this issue whether the defendant and others played there at his (Salling's) invitation, or against his objection and protest. This witness having testified without objection on the part of defendant that the latter and others named played cards, etc., without his consent and against his objection, several times during the late winter and early spring of 1895, the court, against defendant's objection, allowed the state to further show (for the purpose, we suppose, of lending probability to his irrelevant testimony as to the playing being against his objection) that he (the witness) was at that time "an object of charity and lived on what his little girl could obtain by begging of the white folks, and that he was then flat of his back on the floor, that he had had his leg frozen, and that his pants were stuck to his legs." This evidence was not, in our opinion, pertinent to the inquiry whether the house was a public one under the statute, and was improperly admitted.

The two witnesses for the state testified as to the playing and betting at cards, etc., charged in the indictment; that "they saw the defendant play at a game of cards at their house, in Huntsville, Alabama, and that Henry Smith, Ed Smith, the defendant, etc., were present; that the defendant bet money on said game; and that the defendant and said other parties played at witnesses' said house at various times between the 25th of February and the last of March, 1895, and bet on said games." Upon this the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Batson v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • May 26, 1927
    ... ... statute to become a part of the record proper (section 9509, ... Code; Tuskaloosa County v. Logan, 50 Ala. 503; ... Little v. State, 58 Ala. 265; Mobile Saving Bank ... v. Fry, 69 Ala. 348; A.G.S.R. Co. v. Dobbs, 101 ... Ala. 219, 12 So. 770; Nuckols v. State, 109 Ala. 2, ... 19 So. 504), and they are not incorporated in the bill of ... exceptions, or made a ground of the motion for a new trial ... It has long been declared that the party requesting such ... charges must have called the failure to the attention of the ... trial court ... ...
  • Sharp v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • February 11, 1915
    ...not properly made; and no error intervened by this ruling of the court. Stone v. State, 105 Ala. 60, 72, 17 So. 114; Nuckols v. State, 109 Ala. 2, 19 So. 504; Cantrell v. Lindsey, 165 Ala. 233, 51 So. The state's witness, Will Rayfield, on cross-examination testified that he had known the d......
  • New Connellsville Coal & Coke Co. v. Kilgore
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • May 9, 1912
    ... ... This question does ... not seem to have been raised by any demurrer which the court ... passed upon. The record in this case is in a state of some ... confusion because of the unnecessary number of pleas and ... demurrers which were filed by the parties in the cause, and ... we are ... These assignments of error ... necessarily fall to the ground because none of the charges ... are set out in the bill of exceptions. Nuckols v ... State, 109 Ala. 2, 19 So. 504 ... 13 ... There was an exception taken to a portion of the court's ... oral charge to the jury ... ...
  • North Birmingham Lumber Co. v. Sims & White
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • December 17, 1908
    ... ... no knowledge of the whereabouts of Jack, and did not know ... whether he was in the state or dead ... On page ... 9 of the transcript four charges are set out as ... plaintiff's given charges; but this part of the ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT