Thomas v. State
| Decision Date | 25 July 1895 |
| Parties | THOMAS v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Bibb county court; M. Y. Hayes, Judge.
Malinda Thomas was convicted of arson in the third degree, and appeals. Affirmed.
Upon the introduction of all the evidence the defendant requested the court to give to the jury the following written charges and separately excepted to the court's refusal to give each of them as asked: (1) "The court charges the jury that the evidence sufficient to convict Malinda Thomas should not only be a preponderance of mere probabilities, but the evidence should be so convincing as to lead your mind to the conclusion that the defendant cannot be guiltless." (2)
S. D Logan, for appellant.
Wm. C Fitts, Atty. Gen., for the State.
The defendant was tried for the offense of arson in the third degree, under the statute, and convicted. The state's evidence tended to show that she was seen between 8 and 9 o'clock at night to approach the house that was burned with a jug in her hand, and, on reaching it, began pouring oil on it from the jug, and then struck a match and set fire to the oil. She then took up the jug, and started to run away, when Nathan Hill, the owner of the house, fired a gun at her, as she ran. Nathan Hill is one of the witnesses who testified to seeing the defendant commit the offense, as above stated; and he was asked by the state if he had ever seen the jug before, to which he replied that several weeks before the burning he and Will Thomas the husband of defendant, were getting shingles in the woods, and that they had that same jug with them, with kerosene oil in it, and that it was left in the possession of said Will Thomas. The defendant objected to this testimony on the ground that it was irrelevant and incompetent, and that possession of the jug by some one else did not bind the defendant. The court properly overruled the objection. The fact that the jug belonged to, and was in possession of, her husband, before the burning, was a circumstance going to show opportunity in the defendant to have it in her possession at the time of the burning, and to identify her as the guilty agent. The bill of exceptions recites that "the said Nathan's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v. State
... ... defendant, unless the evidence excludes every reasonable ... supposition but that of her guilt ... Howard ... L. Smith, of Tuscaloosa, for appellant ... W.L ... Martin, Atty. Gen., and P.W. Turner, Asst. Atty. Gen., for ... the State ... THOMAS, ... The ... defendant was convicted of murder in the second degree, and ... sentenced to the penitentiary for 25 years ... 1 ... There was no error of the court in permitting the witness ... Etta McCaney to detail certain statements made by the ... defendant. They were ... ...
-
Parham v. State
...she afraid to go about at night wherever she wanted to alone?" was properly disallowed. Poe's Case, 87 Ala. 65, 6 So. 378; Thomas' Case, 107 Ala. 13, 18 So. 229. objection to the question propounded to witness Gibson with respect to a pool of water becoming colored, was properly sustained. ......
-
Green v. State
...and were refused without error. James v. State, 246 Ala. 617, 21 So.2d 847; Way v. State, 155 Ala. 52, 46 So. 273; Thomas v. State, 107 Ala. 13, 18 So. 229. The principle sought to be stated by refused Charges X-2 and X-4 was adequately covered by the oral charge and defendant's given Charg......
-
Tatum v. State
... ... he fled through the woods to the railroad and left the state, ... and remained away until apprehended and brought back by the ... officers to stand trial. Bird v. U.S. 187 U.S. 118; ... Star v. U.S. 164 U.S. 627; Young v. State, ... 40 So. 656; Miller v. State, 19 So. 37; Thomas v ... State, 18 So. 229 ... [142 ... Miss. 114] ANDERSON, J ... Appellant ... was indicted and convicted in the First district of the ... circuit court of Jones County of the crime of murder and ... sentenced to the penitentiary for life. From that ... ...