Opinion
Certiorari denied 207 Ala. 714, 91 So. 923.
June 21, 1921. Rehearing Denied July 19, 1921.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Crenshaw County; A.E. Gamble Judge.
Homer Richburg was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and he appealed. Affirmed.
The facts on which the opinion is rested sufficiently appear therefrom.
Frank B. Bricken, of Luverne, and Hill, Hill, Whiting Thomas, of Montgomery, for appellant.
The trial court erred in permitting Sacks to testify that defendant pleaded guilty in the county court. 83 Ala. 46, 3 So. 305; 10 Ala. App. 183, 65 So. 307; 71 Ala. 271; 3 Ala. App. 24, 58 So. 68. The court erred in allowing the complaint in the circuit court to be so amended as to charge a separate and distinct offense. 16 Ala. App. 138, 75 So. 814; Ala. 68, 1 So. 35; 139 Ala. 120, 35 So. 1009. On these authorities the defendant was entitled to an instructed verdict.
Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., for the State.
Brief of counsel did not reach the Reporter.
The appellant was convicted of a violation of the prohibition laws; a fine being fixed by the jury, and the court adding an additional hard labor sentence. There was no reversible error in permitting the state to show that the defendant pleaded guilty in the county court. There is nothing in the record to show for what offense he pleaded guilty.
In the circuit court no question was raised as to the propriety of the court's action in permitting the solicitor's statement to include the charge of having possession of prohibited liquors, when the original affidavit only charged the selling of such liquors; consequently no such question is here for review. Holland v. State, 139 Ala. 120, 35 So. 1009.
There was only one witness in the case, one Sykes, who testified that the defendant was in possession of a designated amount of whisky or rum and, while he did not taste it, he testified that he smelled it, and it was rum. With this evidence before the jury, the trial court very properly refused the general charge for the defendant.
There is no error in the record, and the judgment appealed from is affirmed.
Affirmed.