Wells v. State
| Decision Date | 16 January 1902 |
| Citation | 31 So. 572,131 Ala. 48 |
| Parties | WELLS v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from city court of Montgomery; W. H. Thomas, Judge.
Shivers Wells was convicted of stealing chickens, and appeals. Affirmed.
The appellant was indicted, tried, and convicted for the larceny of chickens from a chicken house. The chickens alleged to have been stolen were averred to have been the property of a Mrs. McCord. There was evidence introduced on behalf of the state tending to show that the defendant was guilty of the offense charged; one of the witnesses for the state testifying that she saw the defendant at the chicken house on the night the chickens were stolen, and as he ran away. It was further shown that the chickens, after having been stolen, were delivered into the possession of Susannah Matthews by the defendant, and that Mrs. McCord identified the chickens so left with Susannah Matthews as hers, and they were turned over to her. During the examination of Susannah Matthews, who was introduced as a witness for the state, and after she had testified that she had given the chickens to Mrs. McCord, the defendant asked her "what explanation as to her possession did she give Mrs. McCord." The solicitor objected to this question, because it sought to impeach the witness, and no proper predicate had been laid for her impeachment. The court sustained the objection, and the defendant duly excepted. Mrs. McCord had been examined as a witness previous to the examination of Susannah Matthews. The defendant then had Mrs. McCord called as a witness, but she was not present, and upon her refusing to answer the defendant requested the court to delay the progress of the trial until the witness could be brought into court; it being shown that she lived but a short distance from the court house, and the defendant's counsel stating that, while she had not been summoned as a witness for the defendant, he relied upon the fact that she was summoned for the state. The court declined to delay the progress of the trial, but required the defendant to proceed with the evidence. To this ruling the defendant duly excepted. The evidence for the defendant tended to prove an alibi. Bill Love, a witness for the state, testified that he lived a short distance from Mrs McCord's house; that on the night the chickens were stolen from Mrs. McCord, he heard the noise, went to his door, and saw two men running from the chicken house; that before he saw these men he heard a man talking at the house of Berry Perry, who lived across the street from Mrs. McCord and according to his best judgment and belief the voice h...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ellis v. State
... ... [244 Ala. 83] Murphy v. State, 108 Ala ... 10, 18 So. 557 ... It has ... been held proper to ask a witness whether he pleaded guilty ... of petit larceny ( Hutchens v. State, 207 Ala. 126, ... 92 So. 409), and whether he had received a sentence for ... stealing chickens ( Wells v. State, 131 Ala. 48, 31 ... So. 572; Suttle v. State, 18 Ala.App. 411, 92 So ... 531), and whether he served time for larceny ( Orr v ... State, 225 Ala. 642, 144 So. 867), and whether he served ... time in the penitentiary for murder ( Rountree v ... State, 20 Ala.App. 225, 101 So ... ...
-
McDaniel v. State
... ... State, 4 Ala.App. 62, 58 So. 754 ... It was ... competent for the state on cross-examination to ask ... defendant, who testified in his own behalf, as to his ... conviction for crime, for the purpose of affecting his ... credibility as a witness. Section 4009, Code 1907; Wells ... v. State, 131 Ala. 48, 31 So. 572 ... We have ... carefully examined and considered the evidence and the ... exceptions reserved by the defendant, and find no merit in ... the exceptions ... There ... was a conflict in the evidence, and it was sufficient to ... ...
-
York v. State
...abuse should be here predicated. Martin v. State, 31 Ala.App. 86, 13 So.2d 203; Brown v. State, 16 Ala.App. 29, 75 So. 174; Wells v. State, 131 Ala. 48, 31 So. 572. connection with the colloquy about the medical book, the solicitor stated in effect that there was no evidence in the case tha......
-
Wingate v. State
... ... State, 118 Ala. 142, 23 So. 719 ... The ... court was not guilty of error in allowing the state to prove ... by the defendant, for the purpose of casting discredit on his ... testimony on his cross-examination, that he had been ... convicted of a felony. Code, § 4009; Wells v. State, ... 131 Ala. 48, 31 So. 572; Deal v. State, 136 Ala. 52, ... 34 So. 23 ... The ... court committed no error in charging the jury, at the written ... request of the state, that, "if the defendant willingly ... fought with deceased, he cannot claim self-defense." One ... of ... ...