From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Burroughs v. State

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Jan 12, 1932
139 So. 115 (Ala. Crim. App. 1932)

Opinion

5 Div. 853.

January 12, 1932.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Randolph County; S. L. Brewer, Judge.

W. E. Burroughs was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and he appeals.

Reversed and remanded.

H. T. Burns, of Wedowee, for appellant.

Thos. E. Knight, Jr., Atty. Gen., for the State.


The evidence in this record has been read and considered en banc. We have been unable to find any evidence which would warrant a verdict connecting this defendant with the criminal possession of the whisky found on his premises.

As has been pointed out many times by this court, a constructive possession alone is not sufficient to justify a conviction. There must, in addition to such possession, be a guilty scienter.

In line with numerous decisions of this court, we hold that the defendant was entitled to the general charge.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded.

Reversed and remanded.


Summaries of

Burroughs v. State

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Jan 12, 1932
139 So. 115 (Ala. Crim. App. 1932)
Case details for

Burroughs v. State

Case Details

Full title:BURROUGHS v. STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Alabama

Date published: Jan 12, 1932

Citations

139 So. 115 (Ala. Crim. App. 1932)
24 Ala. App. 579

Citing Cases

Snodgrass v. State

Coggin v. State, 23 Ala. App. 135, 122 So. 186. Constructive possession alone is not sufficient to justify a…

PATE v. STATE

Cope v. State, 24 Ala. App. 134, 131 So. 4. Scienter is essential to illegal possession. Burroughs v. State,…