Humbree v. State
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
CLOPTON, J.
— The only exception raised by the record is the refusal of the court to instruct the jury, at the instance of defendant, that if there is any doubt whether the offense .was committed within twelve months before the commencement of tlie prosecution, they must acquit. A doubt which demands an acquittal must be a reasonable doubt, actual and substantial, arising from the insufficiency of the evidence to produce an abiding conviction of the truth of the charge. A possible or speculative doubt is not sufficient. The charge is misleading by reason of failing to distinguish the degrees of doubt, and was properly refused. Farrish v. State, 68 Ala. 164 ; McKleroy v. State, 77 Ala. 95 .
Affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 6 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.