Ex parte Smith

56 So. 247, 1 Ala. App. 535, 1911 Ala. App. LEXIS 292
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided August 9, 1911·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

No question is made as to the power of the court to impose that part of the sentence which was by way of punishment for the offense of which the defendant was convicted. As to the part of the sentence which imposed hard labor for the costs of the suit, it appears that at the time the petition for the writ of habeas corpus was sued out and heard the convict had not served for the period required to pay the costs at the rate of 75 cents per day. This being true, under the ruling made in the case of Ex parte L. J. Haley, Jr., for the benefit of Sherry McWilliams, Infra, 56 South. 245, he was not entitled to be discharged.

Affirmed.

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

Ex parte Smith, 56 So. 247, 1 Ala. App. 535, 1911 Ala. App. LEXIS 292 (Ala. Ct. App. 1911).

56 So. 247 (Ex parte Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Short v. State
243 So. 2d 529 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1971)
City of Anniston v. Douglas
34 So. 2d 467 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1948)
Barrett v. State
90 So. 13 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1921)