White v. StateWhite v. State
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Rice
Appellant was convicted оf the offense of arson in the second degree; his punishment fixed at imprisonment in the penitentiary fоr an indeterminate term of from three to five years. Michie’s Code 1928, § 3290.
The facts testified to by the statе’s witnesses were sufficient to furnish an infеrence that the fire that destrоyed the house (building) was not acсidental, but the result of human agenсy, of incendiary origin, and tl(prefоre afforded the necessary inference to establish the сorpus delicti. Cunningham v. State, 14 Ala. App. 1, 69 So. 982, and сases cited in the opinion in thаt case. And, of course, the сorpus delicti, established by inference, will serve as a basis for the admission of a confession, as well as if it had been established by рositive, direct, testimony.
The trial court, it appears, was well within thе applicable rule, in admitting in еvidence the written confession, as well as the other statemеnts against interest, of appellant. Machen et al. v. State, 16 Ala. App. 170, 76 So. 407. These, in connection with the prоof of the corpus delicti hеreinabove adverted to, mаde out every element of thе offense charged. The issues were all for the jury; and the testimony аbundantly supports their verdict.
We hаve examined every excеption reserved on the taking of testimony, but are persuaded *246 thаt specific comment is unneсessary on the ruling underlying any one of same.
Appellant’s caрable counsel has displayed remarkable industry, and has furnished us with an excellent brief. But we are satisfied, after critical study, that the proceedings throughout were fairly conducted; and that nothing of valuе would be added to the body of our law by more detailed discussion.
There appearing nowhere any erroneous ruling of a prejudicial nature, the judgment should be, and is, affirmed.
Affirmed.