Legal Opinion

Whetstone v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided May 29, 1923No. 3 Div. 438PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSamford, J.

The offense of manufacturing prohibited liquors, like every other crime known to the law, may be established by circumstantial evidence, and where the circumstances proven point to the defendant as the guilty agent with such convincing powér as to convince the jury of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis, they are authorized to so find.

The court .admits the evidence wh"en relevant and competent, but its probative force is for the jury. Cannon v. State, 17 Ala. App. 82, 81 South. 860. The cases of Mitchell v. State, 18 Ala. App.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Cannon v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1919
  2. Mitchell v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1921
  3. Spelce v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1920
  4. Milner v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1921

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Wilcutt v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1960
  2. Anderson v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1925
  3. Bell v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1926
  4. Ex Parte WhetstoneSupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
  5. Wilcutt v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1960

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API