Frederick v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Frederick v. State

138 So. 426, 24 Ala. App. 569, 1931 Ala. App. LEXIS 168

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 15, 1931

Docket6 Div. 131.

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 138 So. 426 (Frederick 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

Frederick v. State, 138 So. 426, 24 Ala. App. 569, 1931 Ala. App. LEXIS 168 (Ala. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

RICE, J.

Prosecution for public drunkenness. Code 1923, § 3883.

The case having originated in the county court, it was permissible, on defendant’s appeal to the circuit court, for the “complaint,” called for by Code 1923, § 3843, to be signed and filed by the “deputy” or “county” solicitor. Code 1923, § 5522. In the absence of anything to the contrary, we assume he acted at the “direction” of the circuit solicitor.

We think it obvious that a “public road” is a “public place,” within the purview of Code 1923, § 3883. The fact that the court declined to so declare it, but left the jury free to decide that it was not, was in appellant’s favor. Hence this action of the court cannot avail for reversal. Supreme Court Rule 45.

*570 Therewas substantial evidence that appellant was guilty as charged. Therefore the case was properly submitted to the jury.

We discover nowhere prejudicial error, and the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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