Anderson v. State

130 Ala. 126
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided November 15, 1900·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

SHARPE, J.

In omitting averments to effect that defendant knew the property described in the indictment [127] was stolen and bad not the intent to restore it to the owner, the indictment in this case fails to charge the offense made punishable by section 5054 of the Code, or any other offense. The criminal court cannot acquire jurisdiction or render a legal judgment of conviction except upon a charge preferred, of conduct which by law is made criminal.—Smith v. State, 68 Ala. 55; Miles v. State, 94 Ala. 106.

The judgment will be reversed and the cause remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Anderson v. State, 130 Ala. 126 (Ala. 1900).

130 Ala. 126 (Anderson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Parker v. State
76 So. 2d 859 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1955)
McElroy v. State
142 So. 590 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1932)
Ex parte Rodgers
67 So. 710 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1915)
Mazett v. State
66 So. 871 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1914)
Fulton v. State
62 So. 959 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1913)
Musgrove v. State
139 Ala. 137 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1903)