Opinion

Rufus v. State

  • 117 Ala. 131
Court
Supreme Court of Alabama
Filed
Nov 15, 1897
Status
Published
Author
McClellan
On the bench
McClellan
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 60.9%

The opinion

McCLELLAN, J.

The trial judge committed no error in finding from the evidence before him that the defendant was known as John Rufus as well as John Rufus George, and that he was as well known by the former of these names as the latter. It was not material that his real surname .was George, and that both the names “John” and “Rufus” were originally Christian names, when, as averred in the replication in effect, and shown by the testimony, the name “Rufus” had come to be regarded as his surname, and he was so known.

The court did not err .in excluding testimony as to Cook’s dangerous and “fussy” character; the defendant being clearly at fault in respect of bringing on the diffi culty. — Johnson v. State, 69 Ala. 253 ; Page v. State, 69 Ala. 229 ; Brown v. State, 74 Ala. 42 .

Affirmed,

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.