Legal Opinion

Birchfield v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 26, 1928No. 5 Div. 964PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAnderson, C. J.

We are at a loss to understand the purpose of the state in showing the existence of tracks and the size of same by the witnesses who had actually seen the two persons while making the tracks and had fully described them, and who must have made tracks as they went along, and one of whom was described as larger than the other. On the other- hand, this evidence could not have been prejudicial to the defendant as it was but a method to establish a fact, in a secondary sense, which had already been established by the best undisputed evidence.

There was no error in permitting the witnesses to…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Curry v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1919
  2. Bachelor v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927
  3. Pritchard v. FowlerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1911
  4. Russell v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1918
  5. Hall v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. George v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1941
  2. Burns v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
  3. Brothers v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1938
  4. Barbour v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1954
  5. Grammer v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1940

15 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