Glover v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Glover v. State

66 So. 877, 11 Ala. App. 287, 1914 Ala. App. LEXIS 61

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 17, 1914

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 66 So. 877 (Glover 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

Glover v. State, 66 So. 877, 11 Ala. App. 287, 1914 Ala. App. LEXIS 61 (Ala. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

PELHAM, P. J.

The ruling on the motion to quash the warrant and affidavit is not reviewable here, in the absence of a bill of exceptions. — Fitzpatrick v. State, 169 Ala. 1, 53 South. 1021.

The time at which the offense was committed was not a necessary averment of the affidavit. It could have been averred as committed at any day before making the affidavit charging the offense (Code, § 7139), and the defendant could have required the state to show that the offense was committed at that time prior to the perferment of the charge that was within the period prescribed by statute in which it is made punishable.— Yancey v. State, 1 Ala. App. 226, 55 South. 267. See also, McDade v. State, 20 Ala. 81, and O’Brien v. State, 91 Ala. 25, 28, 8 South. 560. The demurrer to the affidavit on the ground that it charged the offense to have been committed “within the last 12 months,” was properly overruled.- — Busby v. State, 10 Ala. App. 183, 65 South. 307.

The affidavit for the arrest of the defendant followed the requirements of the Code (section 6745, form 1; section 6737), and this is sufficient. — Campbell v. Johnson, 5 Ala. App. 518, 59 South. 708; Ross v. State, 139 Ala. 144, 36 South. 718. No error is shown by the record.

Affirmed.

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

PELHAM, P. J.

The ruling on the motion to quash the warrant and affidavit is not reviewable here, in the absence of a bill of exceptions. — Fitzpatrick v. State, 169 Ala. 1, 53 South. 1021.

The time at which the offense was committed was not a necessary averment of the affidavit. It could have been averred as committed at any day before making the affidavit charging the offense (Code, § 7139), and the defendant could have required the state to show that the offense was committed at that time prior to the perferment of the charge that was within the period prescribed by statute in which it is made punishable.— Yancey v. State, 1 Ala. App. 226, 55 South. 267. See also, McDade v. State, 20 Ala. 81, and O’Brien v. State, 91 Ala. 25, 28, 8 South. 560. The demurrer to the affidavit on the ground that it charged the offense to have been committed “within the last 12 months,” was properly overruled.- — Busby v. State, 10 Ala. App. 183, 65 South. 307.

The affidavit for the arrest of the defendant followed the requirements of the Code (section 6745, form 1; section 6737), and this is sufficient. — Campbell v. Johnson, 5 Ala. App. 518, 59 South. 708; Ross v. State, 139 Ala. 144, 36 South. 718. No error is shown by the record.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

66 So. 877, 11 Ala. App. 287, 1914 Ala. App. LEXIS 61, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glover-v-state-alactapp-1914.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack