Savage v. State

• Decision Date: 21 June 1913
• Citation: 8 Ala.App. 334,62 So. 999
• Parties: SAVAGE v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Court of Appeals

62 So. 999

8 Ala.App. 334

SAVAGE v. STATE.

Court of Appeals of Alabama

June 21, 1913

Rehearing Denied July 8, 1913

Appeal from Circuit Court, Wilcox County; B.M. Miller, Judge.

Wright Savage was convicted of arson, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.

The witnesses Gulley and Purifoy testify substantially that Wright Savage worked some land that year on Mr. Purifoy's place, and that Wright came to the witness Gulley to get him to find out something about the land, and the solicitor asked him what it was, and, upon objection by the defendant, the solicitor stated to the court that it was proposed to show by the answer to the question the motive for the burning; that defendant understood that Walter Snow had rented land formerly rented by him, and he wanted to find out whether this was true. The witness, answering the question testified: "He [defendant] asked me to go over there and see if this fellow worked on the place with Walter, and see whether Walter ever rented the land. I went over and saw the fellow, and he said, 'Walter Snow [owner of the burned crib] is not after the land,' but that he was the fellow after it"--that is to say, Mark Purifoy, who worked with Walter Snow. The witness then went back to Savage and told him what he had found out. The indictment was as follows omitting the formal charging part: "Wright Savage willfully set fire to or burned a corncrib of Walter Snow." The demurrers were, first, that it did not allege that the corncrib contained corn at the time of the burning second, that it did not allege that the said crib was erected for public use, nor did it allege that its value was more than $500.

Jones &amp Mabry, of Camden, for appellant.

R.C. Brickell, Atty. Gen., and W.L. Martin, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

PELHAM J.

The indictment upon which the defendant was tried contained but one count and charged arson in the second degree, alleging the burning of a corncrib. The evidence showed that the structure burned was a planked-up room or bin used for storing or housing corn, and that connected and used in conjunction with this room and as a part of the structure on three sides thereof were roofed-over sheds or shelters, used for keeping and feeding mules and other stock and for housing and keeping cotton, fodder, wagons, and farm implements. It was also shown by the evidence of the owner that it was called "a crib"; that it was "a barn where [were] kept mules and horses and everything." Some of the state's witnesses testified that the building was known and called a crib; but the evidence without conflict shows that there was no other barn or stable used in connection with the dwelling of the owner besides this building. The description and use to which the structure was put as shown by the...