Hobby v. State
106 So. 918, 21 Ala. App. 675
Opinion
Appellant was convicted of a felony. There is no bill of exceptions. Neither is the oral charge of the court set out in the record. The charges refused to appellant will not be considered. There appearing no prejudicial error in the record, the judgment is affirmed. Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hobby v. State, 106 So. 918, 21 Ala. App. 675 (Ala. Ct. App. 1926).
106 So. 918 (Hobby v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.