midpage

Belser v. StateBelser v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals
Jun 4, 1918
3 Div. 326.
Versions:79 So. 265
16 Ala. App. 504
1918 Ala. App. LEXIS 198
SAMFORD, J.

[1-4] No brief has come to the hands of the court. Charge - requested in writing by the defendant is abstract and does not assert the true rule as to the burden of proof. Charge 1 is entirely abstract. The correct proposition of law applicable to this ease was fully and clearly stated in the oral charge of the court. Charge 2 does not state a correct proposition of law as applied to the testimony of accomplices as provided in section 7897, Code 1907. The test of complicity is: Could the witness be indicted for the offense either as principal or accessory? If not, he is competent. Bass v. State, 37 Ala. 469. An accessory after the fact is a separate and distinct offense, made so by section 6220 of the Code of 1907.

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

Affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Belser v. State
Court Name: Alabama Court of Appeals
Date Published: Jun 4, 1918
Citations: 79 So. 265; 16 Ala. App. 504; 1918 Ala. App. LEXIS 198; 3 Div. 326.
Docket Number: 3 Div. 326.
Court Abbreviation: Ala. Ct. App.
Log In