75 So. 701 | Ala. Ct. App. | 1917
The defendant was indicted, tried, and convicted of having carnal knowledge of a girl over the age of 12 years and under the age of 16. The conviction was had under section 7700 of the Code of 1907, as amended by Acts 1915, p. 137. The principal witness for the state was the girl, Nettie Plott. In fact, the material allegations in the indictment were proven only by her testimony, and upon her testimony the state necessarily relied for a conviction.
Refused charge 9, requested by the defendant in writing, should have been given. Prater v. State,
Charges 2 and 3 should also have been given, as there was no conflict in the testimony of the time and place of the alleged offense, which from the evidence it was contended was committed on the night of October 18, 1915. If the defendant was at his home some three miles distant and did not leave home that night, and was not at the home of Plott, it necessarily follows that he could not have committed the offense with which he was charged at that time. Burton v. State,
For the errors pointed out, the judgment of the lower court is reversed, and the cause remanded.
Reversed and remanded.