Love v. State

There is an expression in Washington v. State, 58 Ala. 355, urged by petitioner, to this effect, that if the guilt of the defendant “depended upon the testimony of thiá witness,” or, to this effect, “a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury of the truth of this witness’ testimony,” said to be contrary to later decisions of this court, to which we will advert.

In Segars v. State, 86 Ala. 59, 5 So.' 558, the court said:

“In a criminal case, a prima facie case of guilt does not generally rebut the presumption of innocence, or shift the burden of proof. Until the state proves, in the first…