Haynes v. State
127 So. 921, 23 Ala. App. 637
Opinion
Defendant, was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and appeals.
Under the decision in Ex parte State ex rel., etc., Re Jinright v.' State, 220 Ala. 268, 125 So. 606, the amendment to the affidavit in this case was immaterial. Error cannot be predicated on this ruling.
The judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Haynes v. State, 127 So. 921, 23 Ala. App. 637 (Ala. Ct. App. 1930).
127 So. 921 (Haynes v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Jinright v. State
125 So. 606 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1929)