Tillis v. State
| Decision Date | 20 December 1928 |
| Docket Number | 4 Div. 365 |
| Citation | 218 Ala. 527,119 So. 215 |
| Parties | TILLIS et al. v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Covington County; J. Morgan Prestwood Judge.
Charlie Tillis and Jean Tillis were convicted of murder in the first degree, and they appeal. Affirmed.
C.B Fuller, of Opp, and A.R. Powell, of Andalusia, for appellants.
Charlie C. McCall, Atty. Gen., for the State.
Charlie Tillis and Jean Tillis were convicted of the murder of Bass Nicholson, and sentenced to imprisonment for life.
The trial was had in Covington county. The killing occurred in Coffee county, near the boundary line between the two counties.
The court in his oral charge correctly instructed the jury that the burden was on the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the offense was committed "within" a quarter of mile of the boundary line of Covington county. Code, § 4895.
The evidence, without conflict, tended to show the killing was within about 150 yards of the county line.
Charge 6, refused to defendant, called for an acquittal if the jury were reasonably satisfied from the evidence "that the killing occurred one fourth of a mile, or more, from the boundary line." The purpose of the charge, as stated in brief, was to induce a construction of the venue statute to the effect that, if the killing occurred at a point exactly one-fourth of a mile from the county line, the venue was in Coffee county only.
We think the oral charge sufficient as applied to the evidence. There was no occasion for the jury to enter upon an inquiry as to whether the killing was precisely on a secondary or venue line running parallel with and a fourth of a mile from the county line.
The statute creates a zone one-half mile wide, a quarter mile on each side the county line, wherein offenses committed are triable in either county. The purpose is to avoid an entire failure of justice because the exact location of the county line with reference to place of the crime cannot be shown beyond a reasonable doubt.
General reputation is admissible as to the location of county boundaries. In connection with evidence that he had lived in the neighborhood all his life, there was no error in admitting the statement of the witness J.B. Cauley: "I know what people calls the county line, I am not a surveyor." Russell v. Robinson, 153 Ala. 327, 44 So. 1040; Morgan v. Mayor, 49 Ala. 349; Tidwell v. State, 70 Ala. 33.
On cross-examination of state witness, Ollie Edwards, the question: "Isn't it a fact that you was keeping Bass' wife at that time and have been since?" was properly disallowed. A witness may not be impeached by inquiry into his personal misconduct.
No evidence tended to connect the witness with the slaying of the deceased, Bass Nicholson. It is not apparent how the matter inquired about would bias the witness against defendants as the alleged slayers of the husband.
That deceased has "been raising sand there with a pistol," and that "just before this shooting he had some trouble with another negro," was properly disallowed as evidence at that stage of the trial. The only evidence then in went to the effect that these defendants walked up to an automobile in which deceased was sitting, one going on either side the car, and at close range, suddenly and without demonstration from deceased, fired upon him and killed him, one using a pistol and the other a shotgun.
No prior misconduct of deceased toward some one else could mitigate such offense. After an issue was raised in the evidence as to the identity of the slayers, the trouble with another negro was fully presented in evidence.
In his oral charge, the court instructed the jury: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Parsons v. State
... ... error not to do so ... Proposition ... numbered XIV. Refused Charge No. 11 ... The ... trial court is sometimes justified in charging the jury that ... they should consider a certain interest of a witness in ... passing on his credibility. Tillis v. State, 218 ... Ala. 527(9), 119 So. 215. But it is not reversible error to ... refuse such a charge since it would be argumentative ... Robertson v. State, 162 Ala. 30, 50 So. 345; ... Mitchell v. State, 133 Ala. 65, 32 So. 132; Horn ... v. State, 102 Ala. 144(8), 15 So. 278; ... ...
-
Wilburn v. State
...is not admissible to discredit them.). "A witness may not be impeached by inquiry into his personal misconduct." Tillis v. State, 218 Ala. 527, 528, 119 So. 215 (1928). Such conduct is generally immaterial. Reeder v. State, 210 Ala. 114, 116, 97 So. 73 (1923). A witness cannot be discredite......
-
Burns v. State, 1 Div. 432
...held that questions concerning whether the witness was divorced and whether she was a prostitute were immaterial); Tillis v. State, 218 Ala. 527, 119 So. 215 (1928) (court held that cross-examination of witness as to whether he had been "keeping" deceased's wife was improper because a witne......
-
Otinger v. State, 8 Div. 416
...making previous contradictory statements should be considered in light of explanations and attending circumstances. Tillis v. State, 218 Ala. 527, 119 So. 215. It is not for the trial judge to pass upon the credibility of a witness. This is a function of the jury. Willcutt v. State, 284 Ala......