Hayter v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Hayter v. State

7 Port. 156

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedJanuary 15, 1838

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 7 Port. 156 (Hayter v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hayter v. State, 7 Port. 156 (Ala. 1838).

Pincite

Opinion

COLLIER, C. J.

— The only question raised in this case is, whether the return by a sheriff “ not found,” on an original and alias scire facias, issued- on a recognizance against hail, in a criminal case, be equivalent to a personal service of the writ? If this question was unaffected by a statutable regulation, we might perhaps determine, that such returns authorised a judgment against the recognizors—3 Petersdorff, 355; 14 Petersdorff, 371, 2; 6 Bac. 103, 120. But the Legislature have forestalled our enquiries; for by the third section of the act of eighteen hundred and thirty-three, (Aik. Dig. 122,) it is enacted, that “notices or scire facias’ shall be directed to the sheriff, and a copy shall be served on each, by the sheriff; and one service on each defendant in said notice or scire facias, shall be sufficient to enable the State to recover.” Now here is an express legislative requisition of the personal service of such process, and in such a case as the one at bar, and must control the pre-existing law. The plaintiff was not before the court for its action against him. The judgment of the Circuit court must therefore be reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings.

GQLDTHWAITE, J. — Not sitting.

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

COLLIER, C. J.

— The only question raised in this case is, whether the return by a sheriff “ not found,” on an original and alias scire facias, issued- on a recognizance against hail, in a criminal case, be equivalent to a personal service of the writ? If this question was unaffected by a statutable regulation, we might perhaps determine, that such returns authorised a judgment against the recognizors—3 Petersdorff, 355; 14 Petersdorff, 371, 2; 6 Bac. 103, 120. But the Legislature have forestalled our enquiries; for by the third section of the act of eighteen hundred and thirty-three, (Aik. Dig. 122,) it is enacted, that “notices or scire facias’ shall be directed to the sheriff, and a copy shall be served on each, by the sheriff; and one service on each defendant in said notice or scire facias, shall be sufficient to enable the State to recover.” Now here is an express legislative requisition of the personal service of such process, and in such a case as the one at bar, and must control the pre-existing law. The plaintiff was not before the court for its action against him. The judgment of the Circuit court must therefore be reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings.

GQLDTHWAITE, J. — Not sitting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 Port. 156, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hayter-v-state-ala-1838.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack