East v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

East v. State

130 So. 920, 24 Ala. App. 632

Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided November 18, 1930·No. 4 Div. 725.·Published

Opinion

BRICKEN, P. J.

Upon an indictment which charged this appellant with the offense of violating the state prohibition laws, this defendant was tried and convicted and was duly sentenced to perform hard labor for the county.

This appeal from the judgment of conviction is predicated upon the record proper only; there being no bill of exceptions.

The record appears regular and without error. Let the judgment of conviction stand affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

BRICKEN, P. J.

Upon an indictment which charged this appellant with the offense of violating the state prohibition laws, this defendant was tried and convicted and was duly sentenced to perform hard labor for the county.

This appeal from the judgment of conviction is predicated upon the record proper only; there being no bill of exceptions.

The record appears regular and without error. Let the judgment of conviction stand affirmed.

Affirmed.

East v. State, 130 So. 920, 24 Ala. App. 632 (Ala. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

130 So. 920 (East v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.