Bonner v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Bonner v. State

58 So. 679, 4 Ala. App. 110, 1912 Ala. App. LEXIS 258

DecidedApril 4, 1912

StatusPublished

This text of 58 So. 679 (Bonner 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

Bonner v. State, 58 So. 679, 4 Ala. App. 110, 1912 Ala. App. LEXIS 258 (Ala. Ct. App. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

de GRAFFENRIED, J.

The only questions presented to us for our consideration go to the sufficiency of the second count of the indictment, which charges “that before the finding of this indictment William Bonner carried a pistol concealed about his person on premises not liis own, or under his control, against the peace and dignity of the state of Alabama.”

The defendant demurred to this count, upon the ground that the act under which the indictment was found was unconstitutional. The act referred to is the act which was construed by the Supreme Court of Alabama in the cases of Felix Vines v. State, 58 South. 1038, [111]*111and Jacob Isaiah v. State, 58 South. 53, at the present term. Following the ruling of the Supreme Court in the above cases, this court holds that the action of the trial court in overruling the demurrer to the second count of the indictment was correct.

The judgment of the court below is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

de GRAFFENRIED, J.

The only questions presented to us for our consideration go to the sufficiency of the second count of the indictment, which charges “that before the finding of this indictment William Bonner carried a pistol concealed about his person on premises not liis own, or under his control, against the peace and dignity of the state of Alabama.”

The defendant demurred to this count, upon the ground that the act under which the indictment was found was unconstitutional. The act referred to is the act which was construed by the Supreme Court of Alabama in the cases of Felix Vines v. State, 58 South. 1038, [111]*111and Jacob Isaiah v. State, 58 South. 53, at the present term. Following the ruling of the Supreme Court in the above cases, this court holds that the action of the trial court in overruling the demurrer to the second count of the indictment was correct.

The judgment of the court below is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 So. 679, 4 Ala. App. 110, 1912 Ala. App. LEXIS 258, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bonner-v-state-alactapp-1912.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack