Opinion

Brown v. State

  • 18 Ala. App. 284
  • 92 So. 16
  • 1921 Ala. App. LEXIS 232
Court
Alabama Court of Appeals
Filed
Jun 21, 1921
Status
Published
On the bench
Samford
Cited by
1 cases

The opinion

On Rehearing.

Upon a more careful consideration of this case, we have come to the conclusion that the trial court erred in permitting the- witness *285 Amos to testify, over the objection and exception of the defendant that a part of the malt found in the sack in defendant’s overcoat pocket had been used in manufacturing liquor. A reading of the entire testimony of this witness discloses beyond question that he did not know-, and could not have known of his own knowledge, the fact to which he was being called upon to testify, and therefore, at the time the objection was interposed and motion made to exclude, his testimony could only have been based upon hearsay and therefore was his conclusion.

The application is granted. The judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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.