History
  • No items yet
midpage
Etheridge v. State
21 Ala. App. 669
| Ala. Ct. App. | 1925
|
Check Treatment

The evidence fails to connect defendants, or either of them, with possession of the stills found. The affirmative charge should have been given for defendants. Hobdy v. State (Ala.App.) 100 So. 571;1 Biddle v. State, 19 Ala. App. 563,99 So. 59; Moon v. State, 19 Ala. App. 176, 95 So. 830; Farmer v. State, 19 Ala. App. 560, 99 So. 59; Medders v. State, 19 Ala. App. 628,99 So. 776; Watts v. State, 19 Ala. App. 549,98 So. 914.

Reversed and remanded.

1 20 Ala. App. 44

Case Details

Case Name: Etheridge v. State
Court Name: Alabama Court of Appeals
Date Published: Jun 30, 1925
Citation: 21 Ala. App. 669
Docket Number: 2 Div. 331.
Court Abbreviation: Ala. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.