Ex Parte Mancill

Alabama Court of Appeals

Ex Parte Mancill

73 So. 756, 15 Ala. App. 421, 1917 Ala. App. LEXIS 3

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 9, 1917

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 73 So. 756 (Ex Parte Mancill) 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

Ex Parte Mancill, 73 So. 756, 15 Ala. App. 421, 1917 Ala. App. LEXIS 3 (Ala. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

PELHAM, P. J.

The tendencies of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor and petitioner, respectively, on the hearing of the application for bail, were conflicting.

Having the proper regard to the weight which should, in such case, be accorded by the revising court to the judgment of the primary tribunal, when the same is presented for review on appeal (Ex parte Sloane, 95 Ala. 22, 11 South. 14; Ex parte *422 McAnally, 53 Ala. 495, 25 Am. Rep. 646; Ex parte Nettles, 58 Ala. 268), it cannot be held that the record presents a case where it is clear that the judge of probate was in error in denying bail.

We refrain from a discussion of the evidence, in view of the fact that the case will stand for trial. The result is that the order of the judge of probate denying bail must be affirmed.

Affirmed.

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