Williams v. State
| Decision Date | 02 September 1924 |
| Docket Number | 4 Div. 959. |
| Citation | 20 Ala.App. 257,101 So. 367 |
| Parties | WILLIAMS v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Covington County; W. L. Parks, Judge.
Forest Williams was convicted of assault with intent to murder, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.
p>Page Powell & Reid and E. O. Baldwin, all of Andalusia, for appellant.
Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., and Lamar Field, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
The defendant was convicted of assault to murder William M Butler in Covington county on or about the 2d day of August 1923. The assault of which the defendant was convicted took place at the house of one Dave Parsons, in which defendant used a knife, cutting Butler, more or less seriously, nine times. The evidence for the state tends to show an unwarranted assault, and that for the defendant, while admitting the cutting, a case of self-defense. It further appears from the evidence that the parties first met on the day of the difficulty at about 4:30 o'clock, at the home of one Metcalf, which was located on land belonging to Butler. Defendant came to the Metcalf house first, and was heard to make a threat against Butler. When they first met some unpleasant words were passed, after which they went together to the Parsons home, about one-fourth of a mile away, for the purpose of seeing Parsons. Nothing occurred on the way to the Parsons house, "more than just common talk." After arriving at the Parsons house, the difficulty arose, and the cutting took place.
The evidence as to the wounds and their severity were questions of material inquiry. Manly v. State, 16 Ala. App 475, 79 So. 149. The testimony of the two state's witnesses, Mr. and Mrs. Metcalf, was not a part of the rest gestæ and was irrelevant and immaterial.
Courts are created...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hodges v. State
...Ala.App. 96, 142 So. 437; Elmore v. State, 26 Ala.App. 290, 158 So. 771; Berry v. State, 27 Ala.App. 507, 175 So. 407; Williams v. State, 20 Ala.App. 257, 101 So. 367. In Elmore, supra, the court 'It was relevant for the state to prove the nature and character of the wound inflicted and, as......
-
Williams v. State
...The issues were properly submitted to the jury. The case has been here once before, and the decision of the court will be found in 20 Ala.App. 257, 101 So. 367. There was no error in overruling defendant's objection to the introduction of testimony as to the conversation between the defenda......
-
King v. State, 8 Div. 926.
...132 So. 711. The evidence here admitted comes under the influence of Vintson v. State, 22 Ala. App. 338, 115 So. 695; Williams v. State, 20 Ala. App. 257, 101 So. 367; Aplin v. State, 19 Ala. 604, 99 So. 734. The effect of this evidence was to prejudice the minds of the jury against the def......
-
Tabb v. State
...such evidence is legal, relating to the issues involved, no defendant should be burdened with this proof." Williams v. State, 20 Ala.App. 257, 258, 101 So. 367, 368 (1924) (in which the State attempted to prejudice the defendant by introducing evidence that he offered whiskey to Negroes so ......