Lumpkin v. State

Dec 15, 1880
Reporters:
Before:
Stone
STONE, J.

The record informs us the grand jury was “ elected, empanneled, sworn, and charged.” In the absence of ‍‌​‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌​‍other showing, we must presume the City Court had the legal oath administered, as it was his duty to do.—Davis v. The State, 54 Ala. 88; Mitchell v. The State, 58 Ala. 417.

To authorize a conviction ‍‌​‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌​‍of a felony on the testimony of an accomplice, such testimony must be corroborated by other evidence tending to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense.- — Code of ‍‌​‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌​‍1876, section 4895. The statute requires this, and only this. The charges asked were properly refused, because they assumed, as a rule of law, that *58the defendant could not be convicted ‍‌​‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌​‍on the testimony of an accomplice, unless there was other testimony which, of itself, would authorize a conviction. This would be to deny to the testimony of the accomplice all weight ‍‌​‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌​‍before the jury. Such is not the law.—Smith v. The State, 59 Ala. 104; Lockett v. The State, 63 Ala. 5.

Affirmed.