Legal Opinion · Dissent

Buckles v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided September 7, 1972No. 1 Div. 731Published

1DissentBloodworth, Justice

I most respectfully dissent. I would affirm the Court of Criminal Appeals, being of the opinion its decision is correct.

The clear effect of the oral charge in this case is to place upon defendant the burden of explaining his possession of recently stolen goods — thus of proving his innocence. The burden of proof is on the State to prove defendant’s guilt.

As pointed out in the exhaustive opinion of Mr. Justice McCall, the older cases of our court, as well as those of the Court of Appeals, have indicated defendant had such burden. Clearly, however, modern authority is to the contrary.

Almost…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Haynes v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1969
  2. Reed v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1972
  3. Chadwick v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1972

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

Powered by the Exa API