Court Opinion

ID: 9825302
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 12:32:48.246889+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:40:40.558988
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
Refused charge 2 was substantially covered in given charge 4. Moreover the proposition of law stated in this charge, while axiomatic, was used in the opinion in Moon’s Case, 19 Ala. App. 176, 95 So. 830, arguendo. When requested in a written charge, its refusal will not constitute reversible error, unless the court by its rulings has so instructed the jury as to render it necessary. - Again the refusal of this charge 2, is without injury to the substantial rights of defendant in this case, as a reading of the entire record discloses that the defendant was given the same consideration in the court’s rulings as if he had been on trial fot any other crime.
The application is overruled.