Marasso v. State
Alabama Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtBricken, P. J.
The court was in
error in charging the jury as a matter of law that the state “witness Boswell (upon whom the state relied principally for a conviction) had absolutely no interest in the conviction of the defendant.” In thus charging the jury there was an invasion of its province, as it was their duty to determine this important question from the testimony, from the demeanor of the witness upon the stand, upon his manner of testifying, and from the facts and circumstances attending the trial. It is true the court undertook to qualify this statement, when exception was reserved thereto; but…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Montgomery v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1920
- Crawley v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1918
- Holmes v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1889
- McQueen v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1895
- Rambo v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1901
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Craven v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1927
- Bush v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1923
- Steele v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1980