Watson v. State
Decision Date | 05 April 1927 |
Docket Number | 5 Div. 629 |
Citation | 112 So. 181,22 Ala.App. 57 |
Parties | WATSON v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Chambers County; S.L. Brewer, Judge.
Restral Watson was convicted of manslaughter in the first degree, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.
Jas. A Hines, of Lafayette, for appellant.
Charlie C. McCall, Atty. Gen., for the State.
This appellant and his brother, Horance Watson, were jointly indicted for the offense of murder in the first degree. The indictment charged that they unlawfully and with malice aforethought killed Jack Shockley by shooting him with a gun or pistol, etc.
A severance was granted upon motion of this appellant, and he alone was placed upon trial which resulted in his conviction of manslaughter in the first degree, and the jury fixed his punishment at 2 1/2 years' imprisonment in the penitentiary. From the judgment of conviction pronounced and entered, in accordance with the verdict of the jury, this appeal was taken.
That Jack Shockley, the person named in the indictment, was shot with a pistol upon the occasion in question, and died as a result of such shooting, and that this appellant fired the shots is without dispute. There was no question as to venue. The evidence shows, without dispute, that this appellant was also seriously wounded by having been shot by Shockley.
The respective contentions were in sharp conflict.
The following statement of facts in appellant's brief is substantially borne out by the record:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Golden v. State
...minutes later and at another place. Prejudice is alleged in that it tended to show defendant was 'trigger-happy.' In Watson v. State, 22 Ala.App. 57, 112 So. 181, cited by defendant, it was harmful error to admit evidence of what a witness saw in a car or of what the occupants of the car we......
-
Jackson v. State
...known to the boys in the car. Cobb v. State, 19 Ala.App. 345, 97 So. 779; Davis v. State, 20 Ala.App. 131, 101 So. 171; Watson v. State (Ala.App.) 112 So. 181. follows that the effort to impeach the state's witness Cabiness by reason of statements made by him out of court that there was whi......