Legal Opinion

Nugent v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided February 22, 1938No. 8 Div. 443PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SAMFORD, Judge.

The testimony for the State ttends to prove that the defendant, with others, was in possession of a complete still on an island in the Tennessee river, within the jurisdiction of the court. Some of the witnesses who were qualified as to their familiarity with still and still parts, suitable to be used in the manufacturing of whisky, testified as to the still and its component parts. This testimony was relevant and admissible, and not subject to the objection that it was conclusions of the witnesses. This testimony comes under the rule of collective facts which may be testified…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Maisel v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1919
  2. Roman v. LentzSupreme Court of Alabama · 1912
  3. Johnson v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1931
  4. Lee v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1931
  5. Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1931

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Robinson v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1955
  2. Kizziah v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1964
  3. Traffenstedt v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1949
  4. Nugent v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1938
  5. Oldham v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API