Davidson v. StateDavidson v. State
Gary Wayne Davidson was convicted of third degree burglary and was sentenced to twenty-one years in the state penitentiary.
During the night of March 19, 1985, a boathouse owned by William Quick was broken into and his motorboat was stolen. After informing the police of the burglary, Mr. Quick and a friend began looking around the lake for the stolen boat. They found the boat pulled up onto a nearby embankment. Several fishing rods and other equipment that had been in the boat were missing, but Mr. Quick found these items hidden in some nearby foliage. The police subsequently set up a stakeout of the area. Later that day, the appellant and Tony Christian were seen walking toward the stolen boat. Terry Osborne, one of the police officers present at the stakeout, testified
I
First, the appellant contends that the testimony of Tony Christian was not sufficiently corroborated. It is well settled law that a defendant cannot be convicted of a felony solely upon the testimony of an accomplice unless that testimony is corroborated by other evidence. Section
“In certain instances, association with the accomplice tending to show the accused‘s proximity, chronologically and geographically, to the alleged offense may furnish sufficient corroboration. [Citations omitted.] Evidence of the defendant‘s possession of property stolen at the time of the offense may also be sufficient to corroborate an accomplice‘s testimony.” Andrews v. State, 370 So.2d 320, 322 (Ala.Cr.App. 1979).
The evidence submitted by the state was clearly sufficient to corroborate the testimony of Tony Christian.
II
Before trial, the court granted the appellant‘s motion for discovery. Pursuant to the court‘s order, the state was required to provide the appellant with a list of all criminal charges pending against those individuals expected to testify for the state. The appellant maintains that, since the state failed to inform him prior to trial that it was also prosecuting Tony Christian for burglary of the boathouse, the trial court should have granted his motion for mistrial. The record herein reveals that the prosecuting attorney was not aware that Christian would testify until the night before the trial. The record also indicates that the assistant district attorney brought out during direct examination of Christian that burglary charges were pending against him. Furthermore, the appellant had an opportunity to impeach Christian with this information on cross-examination. Upon these facts, we find no prejudice to the appellant that would warrant a mistrial. See, Nelson v. State, 440 So.2d 1130 (Ala.Cr.App. 1983). We find no reversible error.
AFFIRMED.
All the Judges concur.