Gilbert v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Gilbert v. State

121 So. 922, 23 Ala. App. 629

Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided March 19, 1929·No. 7 Div. 511.·Published

Opinion

RICE, J.

This entire record, including the whole evidence in the case, has been examined and read by the court, sitting en bane. We are clear to the conclusion that appellant’s motion for a new trial should have been granted, oh the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to sustain the jury’s verdict, and, for the error, in overruling it, the judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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

RICE, J.

This entire record, including the whole evidence in the case, has been examined and read by the court, sitting en bane. We are clear to the conclusion that appellant’s motion for a new trial should have been granted, oh the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to sustain the jury’s verdict, and, for the error, in overruling it, the judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

Gilbert v. State, 121 So. 922, 23 Ala. App. 629 (Ala. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

121 So. 922 (Gilbert v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.