Elliott v. State

The indictment was in two counts. The first count charges manufacturing whisky; and the second the possession of a still, etc. The solicitor, with the approval of the court, entered a nol. pros, as to the second count. This was permissible and left a good indictment charging the manufacture of whisky. Williams v. State, 20 Ala. App. 604, 104 So. 280; Ex parte Williams, 213 Ala. 121, 104 So. 282; Biggers v. State, 20 Ala. App. 632, 104 So. 681.

It has so often been decided, as not here to need citation of authority, that where a defendant charged with crime corruptly offers to buy his release…