Pressnall v. State

Decided April 17, 1917

Alabama Court of Appeals · decided 1917-04-17

Criminal Law <&wkey;1169(2) — Harmless Error —Rulings on Evidence. Error in admitting evidence on prosecution for violating prohibition law that defendant was half drunk when witness met him was rendered harmless by defendant testifying he was full drunk. [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 3138.]

Relies on 15 Ala. App. 461 - Kelsoe v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1917-04-17

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently June 1957

10 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 →

SAMFORD, J.

¶1 The defendant was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and from a judgment of conviction he appeals.

¶2 There are but two questions of law presented by the record for review:

¶3 1. The court, over the objection of the defendant, allowed the witness Waite, who testified for the state, to state that when he first met the defendant on the evening the whisky was obtained, the defendant was half drunk. This was error; but was rendered, error without injury by the defendant himself, who, in his direct testimony, said he was full drunk. Kelsoe v. State, 15 Ala. App. 461, 73 South. 831.

¶4 2. The defendant, when the state Closed its ease, moved to exclude all the testimony, which motion the court overruled. This was not error. There was enough evidence to go ta the jury upon which to base a verdict..

¶5 There is no error in the record, and the case is affirmed.

¶6 Affirmed.