Bridges v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Bridges v. State

106 So. 914, 21 Ala. App. 661

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 8, 1925

Docket6 Div. 738.

StatusPublished

This text of 106 So. 914 (Bridges 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

Bridges v. State, 106 So. 914, 21 Ala. App. 661 (Ala. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, P. J.

The indictment charged that this appellant, John Bridges, did unlawfully and with malice aforethought assault Pred *662 Justice, with the intent to murder him. The trial resulted in his conviction for an assault, and the jury assessed a fine of $250. Defendant having made default in the payment of the fine and costs incident to the trial, or to confess judgment therefor, the court sentenced him to perform hard labor for the county for 90 days to pay the fine and 189 days to pay the costs. From the judgment of conviction, this appeal was taken. No questions are presented for our consideration, except the regularity of the record proper upon which this appeal is predicated. There is no bill of exceptions. No error being apparent on the record, the judgment of conviction in the circuit court is affirmed. Affirmed.

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

BRICKEN, P. J.

The indictment charged that this appellant, John Bridges, did unlawfully and with malice aforethought assault Pred *662 Justice, with the intent to murder him. The trial resulted in his conviction for an assault, and the jury assessed a fine of $250. Defendant having made default in the payment of the fine and costs incident to the trial, or to confess judgment therefor, the court sentenced him to perform hard labor for the county for 90 days to pay the fine and 189 days to pay the costs. From the judgment of conviction, this appeal was taken. No questions are presented for our consideration, except the regularity of the record proper upon which this appeal is predicated. There is no bill of exceptions. No error being apparent on the record, the judgment of conviction in the circuit court is affirmed. Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

106 So. 914, 21 Ala. App. 661, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bridges-v-state-alactapp-1925.