Claybrook v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Claybrook v. State

96 So. 2d 313, 39 Ala. App. 155

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 18, 1957

Docket5 Div. 497

StatusPublished

This text of 96 So. 2d 313 (Claybrook 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

Claybrook v. State, 96 So. 2d 313, 39 Ala. App. 155 (Ala. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

CATES, Judge.

This 'is an appeal by the defendant from a judgment of conviction in a bastardy proceeding. Supreme Court Rule 1, Code 1940, Tit. 7 Appendix, requires an assignment of errors. The lack of such an assignment disposes of this appeal. See Brown v. State, 36 Ala.App. 151, 53 So.2d 633.

Parenthetically and as pure obiter dictum, we wish to state that an examination of the record and a consideration of the appellant’s brief fail to disclose reversible error. The newly discovered evidence described to support a new trial was much like that in Keel v. State, 35 Ala.App. 515, 49 So.2d 320, and were we to have had the case on the merits, we doubt that we would have considered the trial court as having abused its discretion in denying a new trial.

The judgment of the circuit court is

Affirmed.

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