Anderson v. State
This text of 36 So. 2d 244 (Anderson v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
James Lonnie Anderson has filed here his petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that court in Anderson v. State.
The State, acting by and through its Attorney General, has filed a motion to strike Anderson’s petition for writ of certiorari on the ground that there has been no compliance with Rule 36 of the Rules of Practice of this court, Code 1940, Tit. 7 Appendix, in that said petition, as filed, is not on transcript paper.
The State’s motion to strike is well taken and must be granted. The petition, as alleged in the State’s motion to strike, is not on transcript paper, but is written out on ordinary legal cap paper and, therefore, is not in compliance with Supreme Court Rule 36. Peterson v. State, 248 Ala. 179, 27 So.2d 30; Allen v. State, 249 Ala. 201, 30 So. *33 2d 483; Haney v. State, 250 Ala. 664, 36 So.2d 117.
It follows, therefore, that the petition for writ of certiorari filed by James Lonnie Anderson must be stricken. It is so ordered.
Petition for writ of certiorari stricken.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
36 So. 2d 244, 251 Ala. 32, 1948 Ala. LEXIS 675, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-state-ala-1948.