From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Robertson v. State

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Apr 7, 1931
133 So. 742 (Ala. Crim. App. 1931)

Opinion

7 Div. 715.

March 3, 1931. Rehearing Stricken April 7, 1931.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Calhoun County; R. B. Carr, Judge.

Harry Robertson was convicted of robbery, and he appeals.

Reversed and remanded.

S.W. Tate, of Anniston, for appellant.

An indictment for robbery embraces the charges of larceny, attempt to rob, assault, and assault and battery. The jury should have been so instructed as requested by defendant. Morris v. State, 97 Ala. 82, 12 So. 276; Rambo v. State, 134 Ala. 71, 32 So. 650.

Thomas E. Knight, Jr., Atty. Gen., and Jas. L. Screws, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

It is not error to refuse charges substantially given to the jury in other charges; and, where errors complained of did not probably injuriously affect the substantial rights of the appellants, the judgment will not be reversed. Code 1923, § 9509; Supreme Court Rule 45.


Appellant was convicted of the offense of robbery, and his punishment fixed at imprisonment in the penitentiary for the term of ten years. Code 1928, § 5460.

The case was submitted to the jury upon the second count, only, of the indictment. This count was in the form prescribed by Code 1928, § 4556, form 96, and was hence sufficient against demurrer. Code 1928, § 4527.

Under an indictment for robbery, there may be a conviction for assault with intent to rob, for larceny, for attempt to rob, for assault, or for an assault and battery. Rambo v. State, 134 Ala. 71, 32 So. 650; Morris v. State, 97 Ala. 82, 12 So. 276; Carnathan v. State, 18 Ala. App. 452, 93 So. 50; Thomas v. State, 91 Ala. 34, 9 So. 81; Code 1928, § 8697, and many other authorities that might be cited.

Written charge B, requested by appellant, sought to instruct the jury that the law was as set out in the next preceding paragraph. In no other way were they so instructed. We do not think the said charge was abstract, and we must and do hold that its refusal was error, for which the judgment of conviction must be reversed.

We discover no other prejudicially erroneous rulings or actions, but see no need for more extended comment.

The judgment of conviction is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.


Summaries of

Robertson v. State

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Apr 7, 1931
133 So. 742 (Ala. Crim. App. 1931)
Case details for

Robertson v. State

Case Details

Full title:ROBERTSON v. STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Alabama

Date published: Apr 7, 1931

Citations

133 So. 742 (Ala. Crim. App. 1931)
24 Ala. App. 237

Citing Cases

Taylor v. State

Under indictment for robbery, there may be conviction for assault with intent to rob, for assault or for…

Kelly v. State

Under a charge of robbery a conviction for larceny or assault may properly be had. It was error for the court…