From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Biddle v. State

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Feb 5, 1924
19 Ala. App. 563 (Ala. Crim. App. 1924)

Opinion

7 Div. 911.

February 5, 1924.

Appeal from Circuit Court, De Kalb Country; W.W. Haralson, Judge.

Adolphus Biddle was convicted of distilling, and appeals. Reversed and, remanded.

Isbell Scott, of Fort Payne, for appellant.

The evidence was not sufficient to justify a conviction. Moon v. State, ante, p. 176, 95 So. 830; Lee v. State, 18 Ala. App. 566, 93 So. 59.

Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., for the State.

No brief reached the Reporter.


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 on his own premises or premises under his control, a different question would be presented. The affirmative charge should have been given of the defendant as requested. Moon v. State, ante, p. 176, 95 So. 830; Farmer v. State, ante, p. 560, 99 So. 59.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded.

Reversed and remanded.


Summaries of

Biddle v. State

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Feb 5, 1924
19 Ala. App. 563 (Ala. Crim. App. 1924)
Case details for

Biddle v. State

Case Details

Full title:BIDDLE v. STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Alabama

Date published: Feb 5, 1924

Citations

19 Ala. App. 563 (Ala. Crim. App. 1924)
99 So. 59

Citing Cases

House v. State

Mere presence of one where whiskey is being made is not evidence of guilt of making, but only of opportunity.…

Elmore v. State

Mere presence at a still is insufficient upon which to convict. Biddle v. State, 19 Ala. App. 563, 99 So. 59.…