Fox v. State

225 So. 2d 198, 45 Ala. App. 92, 1969 Ala. App. LEXIS 329
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided June 17, 1969·No. 1 Div. 385·Published

Opinion

PRICE, Presiding Judge.

The appellant was found guilty upon a complaint charging that she did buy, sell, or possess prohibited liquors, etc.

The record shows there was no arraignment of appellant. Ordinarily, we would remand. Rorex v. State, 44 Ala.App., 112, 203 So.2d 294. But the warrant to search defendant’s private dwelling was issued by a person not shown to have authority nor in what capacity he acted, upon an affidavit which was based solely on affiant’s conclusion. From the evidence in the record it would be impossible for the state on a remandment to improve its already untenable position.

Reversed and rendered.

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

Fox v. State, 225 So. 2d 198, 45 Ala. App. 92, 1969 Ala. App. LEXIS 329 (Ala. Ct. App. 1969).

225 So. 2d 198 (Fox v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rorex v. State
203 So. 2d 294 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1967)