Puckett v. State, 8 Div. 912.

• Decision Date: 18 March 1930
• Docket Number: 8 Div. 912.
• Citation: Puckett v. State, 127 So. 678, 23 Ala.App. 493 (Ala. App. 1930)
• Parties: PUCKETT v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Court of Appeals

127 So. 678

23 Ala.App. 493

PUCKETT v. STATE.

8 Div. 912.

Court of Appeals of Alabama

March 18, 1930

Rehearing Dismissed April 8, 1930.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Morgan County; R. B. Carr, Judge.

Leander Puckett was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

Certiorari denied by Supreme Court in Puckett v. State(8 Div 204)128 So. 910.

J. N Powell, of Falkville, for appellant.

Charlie C. McCall, Atty. Gen., for the State.

RICE J.

Appellant was convicted, generally, on a trial under an indictment consisting of two counts, one charging that he did unlawfully distill, etc., prohibited liquors, etc., and the other charging him with unlawfully being in possession of a still etc., to be used for the purpose of manufacturing prohibited liquor.

There is no necessity of our discussing the evidence.All that took place, or was observed, at the place where the still was found, was a part of the res gestæ.Testimony about all of same was properly admitted.The fact that more than one still was at said place, the testimony tending to show that the whole outfit, whether one or four stills, was a part of one illicit liquor manufacturing plant, so to speak, did not put upon the state any duty of electing as to which particular still would be the basis of its prosecution against appellant.

Each exception reserved on the taking of testimony has been examined.In each instance it is apparent that the ruling underlying said exception involves only an elementary principle of law, and is not prejudicially erroneous.No separate...