Latner v. State
Alabama Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtSamford, J.
The evidence for the state was positive as contradistinguished from circumstantial evidence, and hence charge No. 3 requested in writing was abstract and misleading. The charge, under the evidence in this case, was properly refused. Bosteen Tatum v. State (Ala. App.) ante, p. 24, 100 So. 569; Ex parte Bud Hill v. State, 19 Ala. App. 618, 100 So. 315.
After the defendants had introduced twelve witnesses, who testified to the defendants’ good character, the court asked de-. fendants’ counsel how many more witnesses he had to offer as to defendants’ character.' Counsel replied giving the names of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Jones v. GlidewellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1890
- Leverett v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1922
- Ex Parte HillSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
- Ward v. DickSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1877
- Hill v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1924
3Cited by4 opinions
- Williams v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1948
- Crews v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1928
- Ex Parte LatnerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
- Jones v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1986