# Brown v. State

> Alabama Court of Appeals · February 11, 1930 · 23 Ala. App. 404

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3224302

## Case

- **Full name:** Brown v. State.
- **Court:** Alabama Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** February 11, 1930
- **Citations:** 23 Ala. App. 404; 126 So. 183; 1930 Ala. App. LEXIS 40
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Samford
- **Judges:** Samford
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3224302

## Opinion text

SAMFORD, J.
The evidence was in conflict, and hence all charges requiring affirmative action by the jury were properly refused.
Other charges asserting correct propositions of law were covered by the court in his oral charge.
The defendant may not be guilty, but two witnesses testified to the facts, and the jury, seeing them and hearing them, believed their story, and the trial judge on motion also believed what they testified to. There is no reason to say that the judge committed error in refusing the motion for new trial.
Let the judgment be affirmed.
Affirmed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3224302. Public record. Not legal advice.