Ex parte W.F., W.L.C., and R.J.J. (In re W.F., W.L.C., and R.J.J. v. State of Alabama)

Summary

The court held that the State's evidence was insufficient to support the petitioners' convictions for night hunting, hunting from a public road, and hunting with the aid of an automobile. It rejected the theory that mere possession of a weapon and a light at night in an area frequented by wildlife establishes attempted night hunting, because an attempt requires both criminal intent and an overt act toward the core conduct of the offense. Because the State had not pursued aiding-and-abetting below, the convictions could not be retried on that theory, and the court ordered acquittals. Justice Stuart, dissenting, would have upheld the convictions based on the trial court's ability to infer the required elements and intent from the circumstantial evidence; Justice Murdock, concurring in the result, agreed that the rejected theory did not establish the statutory elements.