Reed v. State
Decision Date | 07 March 1972 |
Docket Number | 1 Div. 221 |
Citation | 259 So.2d 304,47 Ala.App. 617 |
Parties | Lee REED, alias v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Charles H. Erwin, Mobile, for appellant.
William J. Boxley, Atty. Gen., and Sarah V. Maddox, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
The indictment charged grand larceny and buying, receiving etc., stolen property.
Appellant was convicted of the offense of buying, receiving, concealing or aiding in concealing stolen property, etc.
In his oral charge the court instructed the jury:
The defendant reserved an exception to this portion of the charge.
In Boyd v. State, 150 Ala. 101, 43 So. 204, where the charge was receiving, etc., stolen property, the court said:
The earlier cases used the word 'presumption' in this connection, but later cases hold the correct term is 'inference of guilt.' Hale v. State, 45 Ala.App. 97, 225 So.2d 787; Coats v. State, 257 Ala. 406, 60 So.2d 261.
The trial judge's charge appears to have been derived from the language of the cases cited but what was said in those cases in our opinion was merely stated in holding the verdict of the jury to have been supported by sufficient evidence and was not intended to be given as an instruction to the jury.
In Haynes v. State, 45 Ala.App. 31, 222 So.2d 183, we reversed because the court gave this charge:
'Now, gentlemen, it is the settled law of this state that the recent possession of stolen property,...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Buckles v. State, 1 Div. 731
...court does not explain in what particulars the charge was erroneous and misleading. The court's authority appears to be Reed v. State, 47 Ala.App. 617, 259 So.2d 304. In that case the appellant had been convicted of buying and receiving stolen property. The court held it was error for the t......
-
Buckles v. State, 1 Div. 131
...v. The State, 72 Ala. 220.' It is well here to observe what was stated by our court, per Price, Presiding Judge, in Reed v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 259 So.2d 304, decided March 7, 'The trial judge's charge appears to have been derived from the language of the cases cited but what was said in th......
- Flowers v. State
-
McLester v. State
...position. He relies largely upon Stewart v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 381 So.2d 214, cert. denied, 381 So.2d 220 (1980), and Reed v. State, 47 Ala.App. 617, 259 So.2d 304 (1972). In Stewart v. State, a grand larceny case, the instruction, as quoted at 381 So.2d 220, was, "Insofar as proving the m......