Farmer v. State ( 1924 )

The defendant was convicted under an indictment which in two counts charged the manufacture of whisky and possessing a still, and from the judgment he appeals.

There was no evidence to connect the defendant either with the manufacture of whisky or the possession of a still, other than his mere presence at a still located on lands not in his possession. It has many times been held by this court that this is not sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction. The defendant was entitled to the general affirmative charge. Moon v. State (Ala.App.) 95 So. 830;¹ Guin v. State, ante, p. 67,94 So. 788; Morris v. State, 18 Ala. App. 456, 93 So. 61.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

¹ Ante, p. 176.