This is a 1971 Alabama version of the Eternal Triangle. Oliver Conley was “dating” Mrs. Alvin “Poss” Fletcher. Mr. Fletcher asked a sheriff how much time he wоuld get for murdering Conley. Conley told his father, in response to a warning, that there wasn’t any danger because “all them folks over there liked him.” Fletcher told a relative: “I’ve had all I can stand.”
Alvin “Poss” Fletcher was tried by jury, found guilty of second-degreе murder, and sentenced to twenty years in the penitentiary. He appealed to the Alabama Court of Criminal Apрeals, from whence the cause was transferred to this Court.
Six purported errors are complained of on appeal: (1) denial of a continuance to allow appellant’s mother-in-law to testify; (2) undue restriction of the questioning of prospective jurors; (3) a remark by the trial judge: “If you gentlemen don’t hurry and get this jury struck, I’ll strike it myself;” (4) a ruling that a photоgraph of the deceased prior to the homicide was inadmissible; (5) failure by the State to prove that the gunshot was the cause of death; and (6) that the verdict of the jury was contrary to the weight and preponderance of the evidence.
A motion for a continuance in a criminal case is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court, the exercise of which will not be disturbed unless clearly abused. Peaden v. State,
Appellant complains of alleged undue restriction of his questioning of prospective jurors. He does not argue the point in briеf, or specify as to how this restriction took place. In defense questioning of prospective jurors covering 12 pages of transcript, there were only three occasions that a prosecution objection was sustаined. Defense counsel was not permitted to take the names of those who had previously served on juries. Further, objections to two questions as to whether the jury understood the insanity defense were sustained.
Our statutes provide for examination of jurors as to “qualifications, interest, or bias” and “any matter that might tend to affect their verdict.” Title 30, § 52, Code of Alabama 1940, Recompiled
1958. The scope of examination permitted is within the sound discretion of the trial judge. Dyer v. Statе,
Appellant complains of a remark by the court, “If you gеntlemen don’t hurry and get this jury struck, I’ll strike it myself.”
As discussed in the recent case of Allen v. State,
Photographs are admissible into evidencе if they tend to prove or disprove some disputed or material issue, to illustrate or elucidate some other relevant fact or evidence, to corroborate or disprove some other evidence offered or to be offered. Knight v. State,
Appellant contends that the cause of death was never proven as a matter of law.
In the words of the late Judge Annie Lola Price, in Gurley v. State,
“Of course, it was incumbent upon the State to show a cаusal connection between the injuries inflicted by defendant and the death of deceased, and such fact must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but it may be established by circumstances as well as by direct evidence. * * *
“The еvidence is without dispute that the fender of accused’s automobile struck deceased’s head; she was thrown twelve to fifteen feet by the impact. When picked up she was unconscious and remained unconscious until her death in a hospital five days later. Under the evidence, the question as to whether deceased died as a result of the injuries inflicted by defendant was for the jury.”
We think that under all the evidence testified to by the witnesses that the jury was fully warranted in finding that Conley died of a gunshot wound inflicted by the defendant.
Finally, appellant insists that the verdict of the jury was contrary to the evidenсe.
The grocery store owner, Mr. Lowe, testified as follows:
“Q. What, if anything, did you hear immediately after Mr. Conley walked out the door ?
“A. Well, I heared [sic] it went like a car backfirеd and I started to the window to see what it was.
“Q. Then what happened ?
“A. He came in at the door.
“Q. All right, sir.
“A. And he was . . . and he told me to get the doctor and the law. * * * He fell on the floor. * * * I seen . . . seen a gun pointing through the door and I hollered and said, ‘Don’t shoot that thing in here.’ So, then when I hollered, why, he droрped the gun and come back around come around and peeped into the door where I was at.
“Q. And who was that ?
“A. That was Poss.
“Q. Alvin Fletcher, the defendant ?
“A. Fletcher.”
Also in evidence was a statement by the defendant to lawmen: “Boys, I shot him and I’m not going to give you any trouble.”
At no point did defendаnt deny shooting Conley, or present any evidence whatever to that effect. The jury verdict of guilty was amply supported by the evidence.
No error appearing on close examination of the record, the judgment and sentence are affirmed.
Affirmed.