Witt v. State, 6 Div. 41
| Decision Date | 12 January 1937 |
| Docket Number | 6 Div. 41 |
| Citation | 174 So. 794,27 Ala.App. 409 |
| Parties | WITT v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Rehearing Denied March 23, 1937
Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; Robt. J. Wheeler Judge.
Sandy Witt, Sr., was convicted of manslaughter in the first degree and he appeals.
Affirmed.
Certiorari denied by Supreme Court in Witt v. State (6 Div 117) 174 So. 795.
J. Reese Murray, of Birmingham, for appellant.
A.A. Carmichael, Atty. Gen., and Wm. H. Loeb, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
This is the second appeal in this case. Witt v. State, 26 Ala.App. 465, 162 So. 137. On a retrial of the case in the circuit court, the defendant was again convicted of manslaughter in the first degree and sentenced to a term of nine years in the penitentiary.
A restatement of the facts in the case will not be necessary on this appeal, they having been sufficiently stated in the report of the case, supra. On this appeal, we content ourselves with saying simply that the evidence was in conflict as to each issue involved, and therefore the questions raised by the pleas of not guilty and self-defense were properly submitted to the jury.
It is insisted by appellant's counsel that the court erred in refusing to give written charges 5, 6, 7, 18, and 19. Of these charges, 5, 6, and 7 relate to the law of self-defense and, in each instance, the principle there requested was amply covered by the court in his oral charge and in given charges requested by the defendant in writing. Where this is the case, the refusal to give a written charge as requested will not be made the basis of a reversal. Refused charges 18 and 19 relate to the degree of proof necessary to authorize a conviction, but neither of these charges is predicated on a consideration of the entire evidence in the case. For this reason, they were properly refused. Arrington v. State, 24 Ala.App. 233, 133 So. 592; Humber v. State, 21 Ala.App. 378, 108 So. 646, and authorities there cited.
The objections and exceptions reserved to excerpts from the argument of the solicitor are without merit. Counsel in the presentation of their cases must be allowed a wide range in exhortations to the jury to discharge the duties resting upon them, in such manner as, not only to punish crime, but to protect the public from like offenses, and as an example to deter others from committing like offenses.
Many decisions of the Supreme Court and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cook v. State, 6 Div. 489
...crime, but to protect the public from like offenses and as an example to deter others from committing like offenses. Witt v. State, 27 Ala.App. 409, 174 So.2d 794, cert. denied, 234 Ala. 391, 174 So.2d 795 (1937). Certainly the comments of the prosecutor were not grossly improper or highly ......
-
Bankhead v. State
...of the more recent decisions. McDowell v. State, 238 Ala. 101, 189 So. 183; Campbell v. State, 182 Ala. 18, 62 So. 57; Witt v. State, 27 Ala.App. 409, 174 So. 794. have given refused charge No. 22 in the instant case would have had a tendency to mislead the jury. Vernon v. State, 239 Ala. 5......
-
Johnson v. State
...210 Ala. 96, 97 So. 573; Davidson v. State, 211 Ala. 471, 100 So. 641; Lindsey v. State, 17 Ala.App. 670, 88 So. 189; and Witt v. State, 27 Ala.App. 409, 174 So. 794, certiorari denied 234 Ala. 391, 174 So. We now direct our attention to the claimed error when the court overruled the object......
-
Carroll v. State
...State, 182 Ala. 18, 62 So. 57; Odom v. State, 253 Ala. 571, 46 So.2d 1; Kirkland v. State, 21 Ala.App. 348, 108 So. 262; Witt v. State, 27 Ala.App. 409, 174 So. 794; Kelley v. State, 32 Ala.App. 408, 26 So.2d 633; Krasner v. State, 32 Ala.App. 420, 26 So.2d 519; Richardson v. State, 33 Ala.......