Case ID: ala-app_23/html/0633-09.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "SAMFORD, J.-", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(119 So. 921)
    Ed HALL v. STATE.
    (3 Div. 590.)
    Court of Appeals of Alabama.
    Jan. 22, 1929.
    Hybart, Hare & Dickey,'of Evergreen, for appellant.
    Charlie C. McCall, Atty. Gen., for the State.
   SAMFORD, J.-

Defendant was convicted on a charge of violating the prohibition law. The evidence in this case presents some suspicious circumstances, but, bearing in mind the rule that rests upon the state to prove every material ingredient of the offense by the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, the court is of opinion that the state has not met this burden, and that the motion of the defendant for a new trial should have been granted. Let the judgment be reversed, and the cause remanded.