Biddle v. State

Decided February 5, 1924

Alabama Court of Appeals · decided 1924-02-05

W. Haralson, Judge. Adolphus Biddle was convicted of distilling, and appeals. The evidence was not sufficient to justify a conviction. Moon v. State, ante, p. 176, 95 South. 830; Lee v. State, 18 Ala. App. 566, 93 South. 59. No brief reached the Reporter.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed and remanded · Decided 1924-02-05

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently July 1996

23 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 [1, 2] It is not a violation of the law for a man to be present at a still when whisky is being made. This was all the testimony for the state tended to show. If a defendant is present at a still located oñ his own premises or premises under his control, a different question would be presented. The "affirmative charge should have been given for the defendant as requested. Moon v. State, ante, p. 176, 95 South. 830; Farmer v. State, ante, p. 560, 99 South. 59.

¶2 The judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded.

¶3 Reversed and remanded.