26 Ala. App. 487 - Pate v. State

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently November 1976

12 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.

SAMFORD, Judge.

¶1 It has many times been held by this court that a constructive possession alone is not sufficient to justify a conviction for the unlawful possession of whisky. There must be evidence from which the jury can infer a guilty scienter. Burroughs v. State, 24 Ala. App. 579, 139 So. 115.

¶2 When the evidence for the state was all in and the state had rested its case, the defendant made a motion to exclude the evidence and to discharge the defendant. Denial of defendant’s motion to exclude all evidence is never reversible error. McMullen v. Daniel, 229 Ala. 194, 155 So. 687.

¶3 However, there was not sufficient evidence to connect the defendant with the possession of the whisky, and therefore defendant’s motion for a new trial should have been granted.

¶4 The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.

¶5 Reversed and remanded.