Dodd v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Dodd v. State

180 So. 732, 28 Ala. App. 196, 1938 Ala. App. LEXIS 123

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 19, 1938

Docket7 Div. 354.

StatusPublished

This text of 180 So. 732 (Dodd 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

Dodd v. State, 180 So. 732, 28 Ala. App. 196, 1938 Ala. App. LEXIS 123 (Ala. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

*197 BRICKEN, Presiding Judge.

This prosecution originated in the county court upon an affidavit of R. J. McDowell and the warrant issued thereon.’ She was charged with the offense of violating the prohibition laws of the state, specifically, that she did sell or have in her possession for the purpose of sale, spirituous, vinous, or malt liquors contrary to law. From a judgment of conviction in the county court, the defendant appealed to the circuit court, and was there tried by a jury, who returned a verdict of guilty against her. Judgment of conviction was duly pronounced and entered from which this appeal was taken.

Several special written charges were refused to defendant, and the record contains her motion for a new trial, which was likewise overruled.

There is no bill of exceptions in the transcript, this appeal being rested upon the record proper only. In the absence of a bill of' exceptions, this court is without authority to consider the rulings of the court in refusing to defendant the several requested charges, and in overruling the motion for a new trial. The only question before the court, on appeal, is the regularity of the proceedings in the lower court as disclosed by the record. Upon examination, we find no error apparent on the record; 'therefore the judgment of conviction, from which this appeal was taken, must be, and is, affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

*197 BRICKEN, Presiding Judge.

This prosecution originated in the county court upon an affidavit of R. J. McDowell and the warrant issued thereon.’ She was charged with the offense of violating the prohibition laws of the state, specifically, that she did sell or have in her possession for the purpose of sale, spirituous, vinous, or malt liquors contrary to law. From a judgment of conviction in the county court, the defendant appealed to the circuit court, and was there tried by a jury, who returned a verdict of guilty against her. Judgment of conviction was duly pronounced and entered from which this appeal was taken.

Several special written charges were refused to defendant, and the record contains her motion for a new trial, which was likewise overruled.

There is no bill of exceptions in the transcript, this appeal being rested upon the record proper only. In the absence of a bill of' exceptions, this court is without authority to consider the rulings of the court in refusing to defendant the several requested charges, and in overruling the motion for a new trial. The only question before the court, on appeal, is the regularity of the proceedings in the lower court as disclosed by the record. Upon examination, we find no error apparent on the record; 'therefore the judgment of conviction, from which this appeal was taken, must be, and is, affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

180 So. 732, 28 Ala. App. 196, 1938 Ala. App. LEXIS 123, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dodd-v-state-alactapp-1938.