Miller v. State

Decided June 30, 1916

Alabama Court of Appeals · decided 1916-06-30

Heard before Hon. T. L. Sowell. Oscar Miller was convicted of assault and battery, and appeals. The charge referred to is as follows: The court charges you, gentlemen of the jury, if there is a reasonable doubt of the defendant’s innocence, then should find this defendant not guilty, after conceding all the evidence.

Relies on Gaston v. State · Mitchell v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1916-06-30

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently February 1981

9 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PELHAM, P. J.

¶1 (1) The defendant’s refused charge, set out in the record, that it is insisted shows error requiring a reversal of the case, was properly refused. It does not assert a correct proposition of law, uses patently inapt words, and is confusing and unintelligible. Charges which use words improperly for other words and are thereby rendered unintelligible are properly refused. — Gaston v. State, 161 Ala. 37, 49 South. 876.

¶2 (2) The record does not contain a bill of exceptions or the oral charge of the court, and if the charge was not rendered unintelligible by the use of improper terms, the court would not have the necessary data before it upon which to properly review the action of the lower court in passing on the charge. — Mitchell v. State, 14 Ala. App. 104, 71 South. 982.

¶3 We have examined the record and it shows no error requiring reversal.

¶4 Affirmed.