Hearn v. State
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Montgomery City Court. ■ Heard before Hon. W. H. Thomas. Albert Hearn was convicted of the larceny of certain coppers, and he appeals. There is a fatal variance between the allegations of the indictment and the proof.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Montgomery City Court. ■ Heard before Hon. W. H. Thomas. Albert Hearn was convicted of the larceny of certain coppers, and he appeals. There is a fatal variance between the allegations of the indictment and the proof. The indictment charged the ownership of the wire as being in the Montgomery Street Railway, and the proof showed that it was the property of the Montgomery Traction Company. — Gilmore v. The Stale, 99 Ala. 158; Stone v. The State, 115 Ala. 121; Secs. 7155-7156, Code 1907. Counsel disenss assignments of error as to the admission and exclusion of testimony, with…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCLELLAN, J.
The indictment avers the property, alleged to have been larcenously taken, to have been that of the “Montgomery Street Railway, a corporation.” The evidence shows, without dispute, that the property involved was that of the Montgomery Traction Company. There is no testimony tending to connect the “Montgomery Street Railway, a corporation,” with the subject of the alleged larceny, nor to show the identity of tlie two entities. The variance present between the allegation of ownership of the property and the proof thereof is, of course, fatal.
The affirmative charge requested for the defendant…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Alldredge v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1983
- Peek v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1957