Broadus v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Broadus v. State

105 So. 923, 21 Ala. App. 662

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 17, 1925

Docket1 Div. 630.

StatusPublished

This text of 105 So. 923 (Broadus 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

Broadus v. State, 105 So. 923, 21 Ala. App. 662 (Ala. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, P. J.

The defendant was indicted for the offense of manufacturing, making, or distilling alcoholic, spirituous, malted, or mixed liquors or beverages, a part of which was alcohol, and for the unlawful possession of a still, etc., to be used for the purpose of manufacturing prohibited liquors or beverages. This indictment was returned into open court and duly filed on October 17, 1924. On December 10, 1924, he was arraigned upon this indictment and for answer thereto pleaded, “Guilty as charged therein.” Notwithstanding the plea of guilty, he appealed to this court from the judgment of conviction rendered in the court below. The appeal is upon the record proper, and no error appears thereon. This appeal was manifestly for delay only. Let the judgment appealed from be affirmed. Affirmed.

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

BRICKEN, P. J.

The defendant was indicted for the offense of manufacturing, making, or distilling alcoholic, spirituous, malted, or mixed liquors or beverages, a part of which was alcohol, and for the unlawful possession of a still, etc., to be used for the purpose of manufacturing prohibited liquors or beverages. This indictment was returned into open court and duly filed on October 17, 1924. On December 10, 1924, he was arraigned upon this indictment and for answer thereto pleaded, “Guilty as charged therein.” Notwithstanding the plea of guilty, he appealed to this court from the judgment of conviction rendered in the court below. The appeal is upon the record proper, and no error appears thereon. This appeal was manifestly for delay only. Let the judgment appealed from be affirmed. Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 So. 923, 21 Ala. App. 662, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/broadus-v-state-alactapp-1925.