From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Beasley v. State

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Jan 31, 1928
115 So. 290 (Ala. Crim. App. 1928)

Opinion

7 Div. 395.

January 31, 1928.

Appeal from County Court, De Kalb County; E. M. Baker, Judge.

Mitchell Beasley was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and he appeals. Affirmed.

John B. Isbell, of Ft. Payne, for appellant.

Counsel argue for error in rulings assigned, but without citing authorities.

Charlie C. McCall, Atty. Gen., for the State.

Brief did not reach the Reporter.


Testimony as to the physical conditions of defendant's wife was properly excluded. Under the prohibition laws as they now stand in this state, no person is allowed to possess whisky for medicinal purposes.

The testimony as to certain cans having been found on defendant's premises was illegal, and, when it was ascertained that there was no connection between the cans and the whisky found in the smokehouse, the court excluded all of that testimony. This cured any error.

It was proper to admit testimony as to a quantity of wine having been found in the smokehouse at the time the quart of whisky was found. Under the statute, a person may possess five gallons of wine under certain circumstances, but the exception is defensive matter.

We find no error of a prejudicial nature, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Beasley v. State

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Jan 31, 1928
115 So. 290 (Ala. Crim. App. 1928)
Case details for

Beasley v. State

Case Details

Full title:BEASLEY v. STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Alabama

Date published: Jan 31, 1928

Citations

115 So. 290 (Ala. Crim. App. 1928)
22 Ala. App. 314

Citing Cases

McMillan v. State

There was no error in these rulings. This identical point of decision has been definitely settled in our case…