Opinion
8 Div. 871.
March 20, 1934.
Appeal from County Court, Lawrence County; W. R. Jackson, Judge.
Exel Roberts was convicted of carrying a concealed weapon, and he appeals.
Reversed, and the cause remanded.
Norman W. Harris, of Decatur, for appellant.
A pistol, to be within the purview of the statute, must be such as can be fired in the customary and proper manner or in some other way. The pistol carried by appellant had no attachment which could carry a bullet, was harmless, and did not warrant a conviction. Evins v. State, 46 Ala. 88; Atwood v. State, 53 Ala. 508; Redus v. State, 82 Ala. 53, 2 So. 713; Fielding v. State, 135 Ala. 56, 33 So. 677; Hutchinson v. State, 62 Ala. 3, 34 Am. Rep. 1.
Thos. E. Knight, Jr., Atty. Gen., and Thos. Seay Lawson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
The pistol does not appear to have been introduced in evidence; the description of it is not sufficient as a basis of a judgment by this court.
Appellant was convicted of the offense of carrying a concealed weapon — a pistol. Code 1923, § 3485.
From the bill of exceptions it appears that the pistol shown to have been in the possession, etc., of appellant had "lost so many of its parts as to be harmless and worthless as a weapon" — that it had ceased to be a firearm.
Accordingly, the verdict of guilt, etc., cannot be allowed to stand. Redus v. State, 82 Ala. 53, 2 So. 713.
The judgment of conviction is reversed, and the cause remanded.
Reversed and remanded.