Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

25 Ala. App. 28

140 So 176

Cunningham v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided January 19, 1932

Alabama Court of Appeals · decided 1932-01-19

Relies on 19 Ala. App. 176 - Moon v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1932-01-19

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently December 1973

6 state decisions

2019321940195019601970decided

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.

¶1This defendant was seen carrying a five-gallon jug of whisky from a whisky still. The still was not on land belonging to or under the control of defendant, and there is no evidence tending to connect the defendant with the manufacture of whisky. Another party was attending the still when the officers arrived, and this party was arrested, charged with manufacturing whisky. No one saw defendant do anything except to carry away the five-gallon jug, which they supposed contained whisky. This being all of the evidence tending to connect the defendant with the crime charged, he was entitled to the general charge. Moon v. State, 19 Ala. App. 176, 95 So. 830.

¶2Por the refusal to give this charge the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded.

¶3Reversed and remanded.

¶4On Rehearing.

¶5Application for rehearing granted. Former opinion withdrawn. Opinion substituted. Reversed and remanded.

/25/alaapp/28 · .json · Public domain