Wallace v. State
Decision Date | 18 June 1940 |
Docket Number | 8 Div. 969. |
Citation | 198 So. 711,29 Ala.App. 491 |
Parties | WALLACE v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Rehearing Denied Aug. 6, 1940.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Limestone County; W. W. Callahan, Judge.
Mitchell Wallace was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
Certiorari denied by Supreme Court in Wallace v. State, 8 Div. 71, 198 So. 713.
R. B Patton and D. U. Patton, both of Athens, for appellant.
Thos S. Lawson, Atty. Gen., and John W. Vardaman, Asst. Atty Gen., for the State.
The circuit court, from the judgment of which this appeal was taken, acquired jurisdiction of this case by virtue of an appeal from the judgment rendered against appellant in the Municipal Court of Limestone County where the prosecution originated, and where the offense, charged by affidavit, was for the violation of the State prohibition laws.
The facts of this case are stated by appellant's counsel in brief, and, as stated, are borne out by the record. We quote these facts from said brief: " * *
In this connection appellant insists:
In addition to the facts above quoted, the two State witnesses further testified that "he (appellant) sent Terry Moore for the liquor, and Moore brought the liquor back, handed it to Mr. Wallace (defendant) and Mr. Wallace handed it to me and I paid him sixty-five cents."
The ruling of the trial court in striking count 3 of the affidavit, but in declining to strike the complaint as a whole, was in our opinion correct and without error.
As we see it, but one question remains for our consideration, and this has reference to the insistence of appellant to the effect that the evidence upon which the conviction of this appellant rested, was wrongfully and illegally obtained. Or in other words, that the two undercover men, of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board of Alabama, admittedly entrapped, induced and inveigled defendant to commit the act complained of in this prosecution, and by nefarious and reprehensible artifice lured him to send and secure for them the bottle of whiskey.
The general rule appears to be, where the doing of a particular act is a crime regardless of the consent of anyone, the courts are agreed that if the criminal intent originates in the mind of the accused, and the criminal offense is completed, the fact that an opportunity is furnished, or that the accused is aided in the commission of the crime in order to secure the evidence necessary...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Johnson v. State, 1 Div. 649
...36 Ala. 236; Wilks v. State, 21 Ala.App. 199, 106 So. 681; Nelson v. City of Roanoke, 24 Ala.App. 277, 135 So. 312; Wallace v. State, 29 Ala.App. 491, 198 So. 711; Dodd v. State, 32 Ala.App. 307, 26 So.2d 273; People v. Grijalva, 48 Cal.App.2d 690, 121 P.2d The undisputed evidence in the ca......
-
Corsbie v. Poore
... ... new trial. Cobb v. Malone & Collins, 92 Ala. 630, ... 631, 9 So. 738; Corona Coal Co. v. Sexton, 21 ... Ala.App. 51, 105 So. 716; Worley v. State, 28 ... Ala.App. 486, 188 So. 75 ... It is ... insisted in appellants' "Proposition No. 3:" ... "The statements by Southerland after ... ...
-
Webb v. State
...instructed as to the law with respect to entrapment. We do not agree. There was no entrapment shown by the evidence here. Wallace v. State, 29 Ala.App. 491, 198 So. 711, certiorari denied 240 Ala. 275, 198 So. 713; Dodd v. State, 32 Ala.App. 307, 26 So.2d 273, certiorari denied, 248 Ala. 10......
-
Wallace v. State, 8 Div. 71.
...Wallace for certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that Court in the case of Wallace v. State, 198 So. 711. denied. GARDNER, C.J., and FOSTER and LIVINGSTON, JJ., concur. ...