From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McKenzie v. State

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Jan 15, 1935
158 So. 773 (Ala. Crim. App. 1935)

Opinion

4 Div. 77.

January 15, 1935.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Crenshaw County; A. E. Gamble, Judge.

John Frank McKenzie was convicted of distilling, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

C. R. McKinzie, of Highland Home, for appellant.

Thos. E. Knight, Jr., Atty. Gen., for the State.


The state's witnesses were but two, the sheriff of the county and his deputy. It was entirely a matter of discretion with the court — of which we discover no abuse — that it allowed the sheriff to remain in the courtroom while the deputy testified, and this though the defendant's (appellant's) witnesses were, at the request of the solicitor, put "under the rule." Brannon v. State, 16 Ala. App. 259, 76 So. 991, certiorari denied Id., 201 Ala. 695, 77 So. 999.

The few exceptions reserved on the taking of testimony have each been critically examined by us. In no instance does the ruling underlying same appear to call for discussion. There was patently no prejudicial error in any such ruling.

There was no exception to any part of the court's oral charge, and no refused written charges. The evidence amply supported the verdict.

We discover nowhere error of a prejudicial nature, and the judgment of conviction must be, and is, affirmed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

McKenzie v. State

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Jan 15, 1935
158 So. 773 (Ala. Crim. App. 1935)
Case details for

McKenzie v. State

Case Details

Full title:McKENZIE v. STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Alabama

Date published: Jan 15, 1935

Citations

158 So. 773 (Ala. Crim. App. 1935)
26 Ala. App. 295

Citing Cases

Weatherford v. State

It is within the discretion of the trial judge to excuse some witnesses and not others from the operation of…

Smith v. State

It was within the sound discretion of the judge to allow one of the state's witnesses to be excused from the…