midpage

Gaines v. StateGaines v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals
Jun 29, 1926
8 Div. 429.
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Samford
SAMFORD, J.

Under the rules of evidence obtaining in this state fixed by our decisions, as well as by statute, we ‍‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​​​​​‌​​​​‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‍are bound to hold that there was sufficient evidence in this case upon which the trial judge could reach a conclusion of guilt. Code 1923, § 4650; Coggins v. State, 20 Ala. App. 378, 102 So. 241.

Giving the findings of the trial ‍‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​​​​​‌​​​​‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‍judge the presumptions to which they are entitled under the law, we also hold that the trial j udge did not commit error in overruling the defendant’s motion for a new trial. Coggins’ Case, supra:

Recognizing the persuasive argument of ‍‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​​​​​‌​​​​‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‍appellant’s counsel, we still hold that the Act of the Legislature approved February 11, 1919 (Loc. Acts 1919, p. 17) “To provide for the institution and prosecution of misdemeanors in the circuit court of Madison county, otherwise than ‍‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​​​​​‌​​​​‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‍by indictment by the grand jury,” does not violate sections 7 and 8 of the Constitution of 1901. Roseberry v State, 20 Ala. App. 450, 103 So. 898; Reese v. State, 16 Ala. App. 430, 78 So. 460; Witt v. State, 130 Ala. 129, 30 ‍‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​​​​​‌​​​​‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‍So. 473; Thomas v. State, 107 Ala. 61, 17 So. 941.

We find no error in the record, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Gaines v. State
Court Name: Alabama Court of Appeals
Date Published: Jun 29, 1926
Citations: 110 So. 600; 21 Ala. App. 579; 1926 Ala. App. LEXIS 321; 8 Div. 429.
Docket Number: 8 Div. 429.
Court Abbreviation: Ala. Ct. App.
Log In