Askew v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Askew v. State

63 So. 2d 294, 36 Ala. App. 710, 1953 Ala. App. LEXIS 461, 1953 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 176

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 17, 1953

Docket4 Div. 216

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 63 So. 2d 294 (Askew v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Alabama Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Askew v. State, 63 So. 2d 294, 36 Ala. App. 710, 1953 Ala. App. LEXIS 461, 1953 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 176 (Ala. Ct. App. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

CARR, Presiding Judge.

Robert Wilson, Willie Askew, Richard White, and Eddie Mason were jointly indicted on a charge of rape. Richard White was ill at the time of trial. As to him a continuance was ordered, and the other three defendants were tried jointly. The trial resulted in a judgment of conviction as charged.

Appellant’s brief is devoted entirely to the insistence that each'of the defendants was due the general affirmative charge.

For two reasons this question is not properly before us for review.

The record does not contain all the evidence. The state introduced in evidence the underclothes that were worn by the prosecutrix at the time of the alleged offense. These garments were not sent up to this court. York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188, 39 So.2d 694. See other cases cited under 7 Ala.Digest, Criminal Law, 1121 (2).

The other reason is: The affirmative charge is grouped in the record with other written instructions under the heading “Refused Charges.” Each of the charges contains the name of the trial judge but omits the endorsement “Refused.” In this state of the record we are not privileged to review the propriety of the refusal of any of these instructions. Title 7, Sec. 273, Code 1940; Berry v. State, 231 Ala. 437, 165 So. 97; White v. State, 24 Ala. App. 575, 139 So. 113; Kiker v. State, 233 Ala. 448, 172 So. 290; Garrett v. State, 35 Ala.App. 141, 44 So.2d 260.

Appellant’s counsel excepted to a portion of the court’s oral charge only by reference. The rule requires that the part of the oral charge to which exceptions are reserved must be pointed out or stated in substantially the language used by the trial judge. Review of the matter by the appellate courts is not invited if the attempted exception is stated only in descriptive or general terms. Corder v. State, 32 Ala.App. 584, 28 So.2d 651; J. R. Watkins Co. v. Goggans, 242 Ala. 222, 5 So.2d 472; Ashley v. City of Scottsboro, 32 Ala.App. 660, 29 So.2d 435; Pollard v. Rogers, 234 Ala. 92, 173 So. 881.

The questions to which we have not responded do not merit -any discussion.

The judgment below is ordered affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

CARR, Presiding Judge.

Robert Wilson, Willie Askew, Richard White, and Eddie Mason were jointly indicted on a charge of rape. Richard White was ill at the time of trial. As to him a continuance was ordered, and the other three defendants were tried jointly. The trial resulted in a judgment of conviction as charged.

Appellant’s brief is devoted entirely to the insistence that each'of the defendants was due the general affirmative charge.

For two reasons this question is not properly before us for review.

The record does not contain all the evidence. The state introduced in evidence the underclothes that were worn by the prosecutrix at the time of the alleged offense. These garments were not sent up to this court. York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188, 39 So.2d 694. See other cases cited under 7 Ala.Digest, Criminal Law, 1121 (2).

The other reason is: The affirmative charge is grouped in the record with other written instructions under the heading “Refused Charges.” Each of the charges contains the name of the trial judge but omits the endorsement “Refused.” In this state of the record we are not privileged to review the propriety of the refusal of any of these instructions. Title 7, Sec. 273, Code 1940; Berry v. State, 231 Ala. 437, 165 So. 97; White v. State, 24 Ala. App. 575, 139 So. 113; Kiker v. State, 233 Ala. 448, 172 So. 290; Garrett v. State, 35 Ala.App. 141, 44 So.2d 260.

Appellant’s counsel excepted to a portion of the court’s oral charge only by reference. The rule requires that the part of the oral charge to which exceptions are reserved must be pointed out or stated in substantially the language used by the trial judge. Review of the matter by the appellate courts is not invited if the attempted exception is stated only in descriptive or general terms. Corder v. State, 32 Ala.App. 584, 28 So.2d 651; J. R. Watkins Co. v. Goggans, 242 Ala. 222, 5 So.2d 472; Ashley v. City of Scottsboro, 32 Ala.App. 660, 29 So.2d 435; Pollard v. Rogers, 234 Ala. 92, 173 So. 881.

The questions to which we have not responded do not merit -any discussion.

The judgment below is ordered affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 So. 2d 294, 36 Ala. App. 710, 1953 Ala. App. LEXIS 461, 1953 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 176, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/askew-v-state-alactapp-1953.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack