Opinion
5 Div. 784.
February 18, 1930.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Elmore County; George F. Smoot, Judge.
Homer Carmack was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
Charge 1, refused to defendant, is as follows: "The Court charges the jury that the same rules of evidence apply in prosecution for violating the prohibition law as apply in all other criminal cases, and a conviction cannot be predicated upon suspicion, conjecture or surmise, or mere guesswork but the burden of proof is upon the state to prove the guilt of the accused to a moral certainty and beyond all reasonable doubt."
T. E. Martin, of Montgomery, for appellant.
Counsel argue for error in rulings assigned, but without citation of authorities.
Charlie C. McCall, Atty. Gen., for the State.
Brief did not reach the Reporter.
Appellant was convicted of the offense of violating the prohibition laws by selling, or having in his possession, prohibited liquors, etc.
There were really no exceptions reserved on the taking of testimony which merit any discussion by us.
The issue of appellant's guilt, vel non, was properly left to the jury.
Written charge 1, requested by, and refused to, appellant, was a mere argument, and therefore properly refused.
The case appears to have been correctly tried, throughout, and the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Affirmed.