Wells v. State, 4 Div. 590.
| Decision Date | 17 December 1940 |
| Docket Number | 4 Div. 590. |
| Parties | WELLS v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Houston County; D. C. Halstead, Judge.
J. W Wells was convicted of petit larceny, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
J. N Mullins, of Dothan, for appellant.
Thos S. Lawson, Atty. Gen., and Wm. N. McQueen, Asst. Atty. Gen for the State.
From a judgment of conviction of petit larceny, this appeal was taken.
Upon the trial of this case, in the court below, a large number of witnesses were introduced and gave testimony. However, pending the trial, no rulings of the court were invoked except the action of the court in refusing to give, at request of defendant, the general affirmative charge; and also in overruling his motion for a new trial.
Each of the foregoing insistences must be decided adversely to the appellant.
The case, under review, presented a question of fact, pure and simple, and for this court to render judgment of reversal it would be tantamount to a substitution of this court for the jury, and trial judge, who tried the case in the court below.
Briefly stated, the alleged injured party, Travis Mixon, Jr., missed, from his farm, a number of hogs. As to this there is no dispute or conflict. A few days later he found, and identified, four of said hogs in the possession of Vann & Baxley who were engaged in the business of buying hogs on a large scale. After positive identification of said hogs, the said Vann & Baxley turned them over to Travis Mixon, Jr., with the information they had bought said four head of hogs from one Willis McArthur, also a hog buyer; and McArthur, in turn, testified he had purchased the hogs in question from the defendant. All of which was without dispute or conflict.
The defendant testified that the hogs he sold to McArthur were his own property; that he had bought them in Florida; and he offered the testimony of other witnesses which tended to corroborate him in the statement he had bought the hogs in Florida. Defendant further testified that these hogs in question, with others, had strayed away from his place, and he received information that a Mr. Arthur Thomas had taken up as estrayed a number of hogs. He testified he went over to see the hogs at Thomas' place, the first trip being at night, and on that trip he was unable to say positively that the hogs in Thomas' pen were his property. But three or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brackin v. State
...14 So.2d 383 31 Ala.App. 228 BRACKIN v. STATE. 6 Div. 1.Alabama Court of AppealsJune 30, 1943 [14 So.2d 384] ... of Birmingham was permitted to serve upon the jury, and (4) ... the jury, during their deliberations, engaged in a discussion ... Adams v. State, 29 ... Ala.App. 547, 198 So. 451; Wells v. State, 29 Ala ... App. 586, 199 So. 253; Wilson v. State, 30 Ala.App ... ...
-
Sims v. State
...to resolve the conflicting tendencies of the evidence and ferret out the truth. This is not our jurisdiction or authority. Wells v. State, 29 Ala.App. 586, 199 So. 253. cannot-were we so minded-sit as a court of original trial and thereby supplant the jury's findings. Adams v. State, supra;......
-
Wilson v. State
...3 So.2d 136 30 Ala.App. 126 WILSON v. STATE. 8 Div. 123.Alabama Court of AppealsMarch 18, 1941 ... Rehearing ... verdict after a proper consideration thereof. Wells v ... State, 29 Ala.App. 586, 199 So. 253; Brown v ... State, 20 ... ...
-
Ruffin v. State
...6 So.2d 455 30 Ala.App. 344 RUFFIN et al. v. STATE. 2 Div. 703.Alabama Court of AppealsDecember 16, 1941 ... Rehearing ... denied 241 Ala. 141, 1 So.2d 605; Wells v. State, 29 ... Ala.App. 586, 199 So. 253 ... Our ... duty ... ...