142 So. 437 | Ala. Ct. App. | 1932
From a judgment of conviction for the offense of assault with intent to murder, this appeal was taken.
Appellant complains at the rulings of the court in allowing the state to prove the relative size of the defendant and of Spear, the alleged injured party; also, the extent and nature of the injury admittedly inflicted upon Spear by the accused, and his condition. In these rulings there was no error. Hicks v. State,
Other rulings of the court upon the admission of evidence are equally free from injurious error. No discussion of the questions raised in this connection is necessary.
The oral charge of the court when considered as a whole, which must be done, is free from reversible error. The exceptions thereto are without merit and cannot be sustained.
The oral charge of the court, coupled with the several charges given at the request of appellant, fairly and substantially covered such of the refused charges as properly stated the law. Refused charges 1 and 2 were refused without error.
No error of a reversible nature appears in any of the court's rulings. The judgment of conviction from which this appeal was taken will stand affirmed.
Affirmed. *97