Case ID: ala-app_17/html/0442-02.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

(85 South. 834)
    JONES v. STATE.
    (2 Div. 209.)
    (Court of Appeals of Alabama.
    May 18, 1920.)
    1. Trespass &wkey;>89 — General Affirmative Charge for the State Erroneous, where. Information Laid Possession Jointly in Several and Evidence Showed Possession in One Only.
    Where the information for trespass laid' the possession of the property jointly in five parties, while the uncontradicted evidence disclosed that the possession was in only one-party, it was error to give the general affirmative charge for the state.
    2. Criminal Law e&wkey;561(l) — Jury Authorized to Return Verdict of Guilt only WHEN THEY BELIEVE EVIDENCE BEYOND A Reasonable Doubt.
    A jury is only authorized to return It verdict of guilt against a defendant charged with crime when they believe the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
    Appeal from Circuit Court, Choctaw County ; Ben D. Turner, Judge.
    Art Jones was tried upon an information, of the solicitor based upon an affidavit charging trespass after warning, was convicted, and, from the judgment, he appeals.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Joe D. Lindsey, of Butler, for appellant..
    No brief reached the Reporter.
    J. Q. Smith, Atty. Gen., and Horace Wilkinson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
    No brief reached the Reporter.
   SAMFORD, J.

The hill of exceptions in this case is not in strict accord with the rules of this court, but it does not present such a case as would authorize the striking of the bill of exceptions.

The information of the solicitor lays the possession of the property jointly in five parties,- while the uncontradicted evidence discloses tlie fact that the possession was only in one party. For this reason, the court erred in giving the general affirmative charge for the state as requested.

The affirmative charge, given at the request of the state, was as follows: “If you believe the evidence in this case, you should find the defendant guilty.”

A jury is only authorized to return a verdict of guilt against a defendant charged with crime when they believe the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. This being omitted from the charge as requested, the court committed error.

For the two errors above pointed out, the • judgment of the circuit court is reversed and the cause is remande^.

Reversed and remanded.