Biles v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Biles v. State

78 So. 320, 16 Ala. App. 404, 1918 Ala. App. LEXIS 83

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 12, 1918

Docket8 Div. 530.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 78 So. 320 (Biles 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

Biles v. State, 78 So. 320, 16 Ala. App. 404, 1918 Ala. App. LEXIS 83 (Ala. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

BBICICEN, J.

The defendant was tried and convicted for the offense of violating the prohibition law. The prosecution was based upon an affidavit, to which no objection by demurrer or otherwise was interposed. This appeal is upon the record, and without a bill of exceptions.

The trial judge certifies that no bill of exceptions has been presented to him, and the time for filing same has expired. The record contains the given and refused charges, but the oral charge of the court is not set *405 out. In the absence of a bill of exceptions and the oral charge »f the court, -this court cannot review the charges which were refused to the defendant. The record appears to be free-from error, and the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

BBICICEN, J.

The defendant was tried and convicted for the offense of violating the prohibition law. The prosecution was based upon an affidavit, to which no objection by demurrer or otherwise was interposed. This appeal is upon the record, and without a bill of exceptions.

The trial judge certifies that no bill of exceptions has been presented to him, and the time for filing same has expired. The record contains the given and refused charges, but the oral charge of the court is not set *405 out. In the absence of a bill of exceptions and the oral charge »f the court, -this court cannot review the charges which were refused to the defendant. The record appears to be free-from error, and the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

78 So. 320, 16 Ala. App. 404, 1918 Ala. App. LEXIS 83, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/biles-v-state-alactapp-1918.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack