midpage

Beck v. StateBeck v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals
Feb 11, 1930
7 Div. 624.
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Samford
SAMFORD, J.

The evidence in this case discloses a state of fapts from which the jury was authorized to draw inference of guilt, and while the officers found only two or three teaspoonfuls of whisky, there was evidence which, if believed beyond a reasonable doubt, tended to prove a larger quantity. However, under our decisions the quantity is immaterial. The general charge was properly refused.

Refused charge 2 is covered by the oral charge.

The evidence ‘being in conflict and giving to the conclusions of the court the weight to which they are entitled, we cannot say there was error in overruling the motion for a new trial.

There is no error in the record, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Beck v. State
Court Name: Alabama Court of Appeals
Date Published: Feb 11, 1930
Citations: 126 So. 182; 23 Ala. App. 398; 1930 Ala. App. LEXIS 34; 7 Div. 624.
Docket Number: 7 Div. 624.
Court Abbreviation: Ala. Ct. App.
Log In