Skelton v. State

There is no testimony found in this record, from which the jury could have been authorized to infer that the defendant, when he obtained the mule, believed he had the owner’s permission or assent thereto. The charge asked was, consequently, abstract, and was rightly refused on that account, if for no other reason. — 1 Brick. Dig. 338, § 40 ; M. & E. R. R. Co. v. Kolb, 73 Ala. 396.

Affirmed.