Waters v. State

• Decision Date: 01 February 1898
• Citation: 23 So. 28,117 Ala. 189
• Parties: WATERS v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

23 So. 28

117 Ala. 189

WATERS v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

February 1, 1898

Appeal from circuit court, Henry county; J. W. Foster, Judge.

Bob Waters was convicted for failure to work the public road after having received notice, and he appeals. Reversed.

The prosecution in this case was commenced before a justice of the peace of Henry county, and charged that "Bob Waters after having been duly summoned to appear and work the Columbia and Rocky Creek road, beginning at the forks of Rocky Creek and Dothan road, and running to the six-mile post towards Ashford, Ala., failed to appear and work said road against the peace and dignity of the state of Alabama." The warrant was issued upon this affidavit, and the defendant was tried and convicted by the justice of the peace for failure to work the public road after having received notice. An appeal was then taken by the defendant to the circuit court. As shown by the record, the affidavit and warrant was placed upon the trial in the circuit court for a statement of the cause of complaint, which is required to be filed by the solicitor in cases of appeal. The sufficiency of the affidavit and warrant was not questioned by demurrer or otherwise, but the cause was tried thereupon as they were prepared by the justice of the peace. The evidence for the state tended to show that the defendant failed to appear and work the public road after having been notified by the overseer of such road to do so. The evidence for the defendant tended to show that he had been notified by another overseer to work a different road, and had performed the work on that road. The defendant requested the court to give to the jury two charges, and separately excepted to the court's refusal to give each of them as asked. The first charge was the general affirmative charge in his behalf. The second charge was as follows: "In determining the guilt or innocence of the defendant, the jury should look to the fact, if it be a fact, in connection with all the evidence that defendant was notified by two overseers to work two different roads at or about the same time, if they further believe that such warnings were given at or about the same time." After the return of the verdict of guilty, the defendant moved the court for an arrest of judgment, upon the grounds "that the affidavit of complaint before the justice of the peace, whereby the prosecution in said cause was commenced, and which, by...