Legal Opinion

Elmore v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided May 11, 1926No. 8 Div. 349PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSamford, J.

We have held in many eases that the mere presence of a person at a still was not sufficient to overcome the presumption of innocence which attends a defendant charged with, and who is on trial for, a criminal offense. Biddle v. State, 19 Ala. App. 563, 99 So. 59; Biddle v. State, 20 Ala. App. 49, 100 So. 572. This general statement, while still adhered to, cannot be so extended as to invade the province of the jury in passing upon the guilt or innocence of a defendant, whose acts or conduct raises other presumptions tending to connect him with the manufacture of whisky or the possession of a…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Biddle v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1924
  2. Biddle v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1924

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. German v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1982
  2. York v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1948
  3. Gills v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1950
  4. Walker v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1948
  5. Elmore v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API