White v. State
| Decision Date | 12 January 1932 |
| Docket Number | 6 Div. 212. |
| Citation | 139 So. 113,24 Ala.App. 575 |
| Parties | WHITE v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Pickens County; Benj. F. Elmore, Judge.
Elmer E. White was convicted of assault with intent to rob, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
D. D. Patton and M. B. Curry, both of Carrollton, for appellant.
Thos. E. Knight, Jr., Atty. Gen., and Jas. L. Screws, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
The demurrers to the indictment were properly overruled. Douglass v. State, 21 Ala. App. 289, 107 So. 791; Sims v. State, 23 Ala. App. 387, 126 So. 498; Terry v. State (Ala. App.) 134 So. 820.
We find no fault in the rulings of the court permitting testimony as to what occurred at the time of the arrest of appellant; his efforts to evade arrest, etc. Evidence as to any conduct or declarations of the accused having relation to the offense charged, indicating his consciousness of guilt, is always admissible. Palmer v. State, 15 Ala. App. 262, 73 So. 139; Ex parte Palmer, 198 Ala. 693, 73 So. 1001; Horn v. State, 102 Ala. 144, 15 So. 278; Starling v. State, 18 Ala. App. 610, 93 So. 221; Jackson v. State, 11 Ala. App. 303, 66 So. 877.
It seems that under the holding of our Supreme Court in the case of Stinson v. State, 135 So. 571, 575, we are unable to review the action of the trial court in "refusing" certain written charges, appearing in the record, because "what appear in the record proper [but, here, in the bill of exceptions] as special charges were not, so far as anything appearing in the record [or anywhere else, we interpolate], authoritatively indorsed 'refused' *** by the trial judge, as required by the statute, and the mere statement of the clerk to this effect is not authorized by the statute." Stinson v. State, supra.
The indictment charged the appellant with the offense of "assault with intent to rob." Code 1923, § 3303. He was found, by the jury, guilty "as charged in the indictment." His adjudication of guilt, and punishment awarded, followed, accordingly. The evidence was ample to support the verdict and judgment, and the motion for a new trial was properly overruled.
We discover, nowhere, prejudicial error, and the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Golston v. State
...that the evidence in this case would justify a conviction of 'attempted robbery,' appellant relies partly upon White v. State, 24 Ala.App. 575, 139 So. 113 (1932) wherein defendant came into a bank with a gun in his hand, told the cashier to 'stick 'em up' and walked over and put the money ......
-
Richardson v. State
...here is whether the defendant could have been guilty under the evidence of merely an attempt to rob as distinguished from robbery? In White, the indictment charged an assault with intent to rob. It did not charge robbery. The court did not hold that he could have been legally convicted of a......
- Sutherland v. State, 6 Div. 58.
-
Garrett v. State, 7 Div. 996
...'refused' and the name of the trial judge. Sec. 273, Title 7, Code 1940; Kiker v. State, 233 Ala. 448, 172 So. 290; White v. State, 24 Ala.App. 575, 139 So. 113. We are frank to state that, under the evidence, the accused was not due the general affirmative charge as to manslaughter in the ......