Williams v. State, 3 Div. 114

Decision Date30 June 1980
Docket Number3 Div. 114
Citation389 So.2d 151
PartiesAlonzo WILLIAMS v. STATE.
CourtAlabama Court of Criminal Appeals

L. H. Walden, Montgomery, for appellant.

Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and J. Anthony McLain, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

JOSEPH J. MULLINS, Retired Circuit Judge.

The grand jury of Montgomery County returned an indictment for robbery against the appellant, Alonzo Williams, and upon arraignment he entered a plea of not guilty, was found guilty as charged and duly sentenced to ten years imprisonment, and appellant gave notice of appeal to this court.

The appellant was represented by counsel of his choice at all proceedings in the trial court and is represented in this court by the same counsel under appointment by the trial court. This appeal was submitted to this court on briefs.

The appellant, in his brief, contends that the trial court erred to his prejudice on three grounds: First, by allowing into evidence a statement made by Charley Anderson to Charley Flowers which was hearsay and was not admissible under any exception to the hearsay rule; second, by allowing a pistol, found on defendant, into evidence; third, by allowing hearsay evidence in as to identification of the accused.

For the first error complained of by appellant we quote from the record the direct examination of State's witness, Charley Flowers:

"Q. Tell us what you saw?

"A. Okay. I went in the house because I was going out front to get a drink, and I saw one boy down on Charley, had him down rolling him. And, so I saw somebody else run out the house and Charley said, Buster Crabbe done robbed me.

"MR. WALDEN: Objection.

"THE COURT: Don't say what somebody else told you, Mr. Flowers.

"MR. POOL: Your Honor, at this time, I would submit that the statement made by Mr. Anderson in this excited utterance would be admissible as part of the res gestae.

"THE COURT: All right. Go ahead.

"Q. (Mr. Pool continues) What did he say to you as the man ran out the door?

"MR. WALDEN: Judge, we would like to have an exception.

"THE COURT: All right.

"A. Said, Buster Crabbe and them done robbed me. So I ran to the door and I looked and I didn't see nobody but Buster.

"Q. And you know him when you see him?

"A. Yes, sir.

"Q. And you saw him run away?

"A. Yes, sir. Went down the street.

"Q. Down Robinson Street?

"A. Yes, sir."

Charley Anderson, the injured party, had testified in substance, that the appellant was known to him as Buster Crabbe; that he knew Buster Crabbe's voice; that appellant and a companion robbed him of $580.00; that he had known the appellant well for about five years; that appellant had on a ski mask and had two pistols, one in each hand, and appellant's companion had one pistol; that appellant and his companion, with one pistol in his hand, made Anderson lie down on the floor; while Anderson was on the floor appellant's companion took Anderson's pocketbook, and the appellant told his companion to look in the left pocket, that was where Anderson carried his one-dollar bills; then appellant told his companion to get the change from Anderson's front pocket, at which time Charley Flowers and Willie Williams came up the back steps, and the appellant and his companion broke and ran out the door, and one went one way and the other went the other way; that Charley Anderson got up from the floor, and they went to the front door and saw appellant running until he turned the corner and went down the hill.

Willie Williams, a witness called by the State, testified in substance, the following: That he knew Charley Anderson; that on October 30, 1978 he and Charley Flowers were downstairs at Charley Anderson's house working on a car; that about 10:00 o'clock he went upstairs at Anderson's house and when he opened the back door and looked around, he saw Charley Anderson lying on the floor with his hands out in front of him, and a "kind of a tall dude was down over him" going through his pockets; that when the "dude" saw Willie Williams and Charley Flowers come in at the door, the "dude" ran; that they rushed to the front door on the sidewalk, and Willie Williams saw Buster Crabbe running down the street away from Charley Anderson's house.

We hold that, under the facts shown by this record, the trial judge could reasonably conclude that the statement made by Mr. Anderson to Charley Flowers was, in fact, a part of res gestae. For a statement made by parties at the scene of a crime to be admissible as a part of the res gestae exception to the hearsay rule, it must be incident to what was done, and shed light on the main fact, and be instinctive and spontaneous, and not deliberative or retrospective. Harrison v. Baker, 260 Ala. 488, 71 So.2d 284; Williams v. State, 291 Ala. 213, 279 So.2d 478; Davis v. State, 51 Ala.App. 200, 283 So.2d 650; Bass v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 375 So.2d 540.

Next, the appellant complains that the trial court committed reversible error by allowing State's Exhibit No. 2, a pistol found on the appellant, into evidence.

We quote from the record:

"MR. POOL: No redirect. Judge, I will ask that State's Exhibits 1, 2, and 3 be admitted in evidence, at this time.

"MR. WALDEN: Now, Your Honor, we are going to object to any bullets being admitted.

"THE COURT: All right. The bullets are out but I will let 1 and 2 in.

"MR. POOL: Judge, at this time the State rests."

State's Exhibit 1, was a photograph of a lineup. Exhibit 2, was a .38 caliber revolver, and Exhibit 3, was five, live rounds of .38 ammunition. There being no objection to State's Exhibit 2 being introduced into evidence, there is nothing for this court to review. Pugh v. State, 247 Ala. 535, 25 So.2d 417. McLoyd v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 373 So.2d 1175; cert. den. Ala., 373 So.2d 1185.

The appellant further complains that the trial court erred to his prejudice by allowing hearsay evidence in as to identification of the accused. The court, out of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Edwards v. State, 1 Div. 100
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 25 Noviembre 1986
    ...part of the res gestae of the offense. Allen v. State, 382 So.2d 1147 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 382 So.2d 1158 (Ala.1980); Williams v. State, 389 So.2d 151 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 389 So.2d 154 (Ala.1980); Bass v. State, 375 So.2d 540 (Ala.Crim.App.1979)." Reeves v. State, 456 S......
  • Lovett v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 28 Enero 1986
    ...done, and shed light on the main fact, and be instinctive and spontaneous, and not deliberative or restrospective." Williams v. State, 389 So.2d 151, 153 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 389 So.2d 154 Although "[t]ime alone is not a determining criterion when the question is whether a thing sai......
  • Farley v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 4 Agosto 1981
    ...406 So.2d 1045 ... Jimmy FARLEY ... 6 Div. 397 ... Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama ... Aug. 4, 1981 ... Spears v. State, 22 Ala.App. 257, 114 So. 477 (1927) ...         Here, the defendant's wife testified ... ...
  • Reeves v. State, 8 Div. 761
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 14 Agosto 1984
    ...part of the res gestae of the offense. Allen v. State, 382 So.2d 1147 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 382 So.2d 1158 (Ala.1980); Williams v. State, 389 So.2d 151 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 389 So.2d 154 (Ala.1980); Bass v. State, 375 So.2d 540 The appellant contends that the trial court ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT