Hughes v. State

66 So. 844, 11 Ala. App. 307, 1914 Ala. App. LEXIS 70
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided November 24, 1914·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

THOMAS, J.

What purports to be a bill of exceptions found in the record contains no exceptions, and is consequently not a bill of exceptions, and presents no rulings of the lower court for review. — Blackwell v. State, 8 Ala. App. 430, 62 South. 1034.

The indictment contains three counts, one for burglary, one for grand larceny, and one for receiving stolen goods, knowing them to be stolen. There was a general verdict of guilty, and the court adjudged the defendant guilty of burglary, and sentenced him to the penitentiary for three years. In this there was no error. — Cawley v. State, 37 Ala. 152; Johnson v. State, 50 Ala. 459; McGuff v. State, 88 Ala. 150, 7 South. 35, 10 Am. St. Rep. 25; Lucas v. State, 144 Ala. 63, 39 South. 822, 3 L. R. A. (N. S.) 412; Sampson v. State, 107 Ala. 76, 18 South. 207; Orr v. State, 107 Ala. 35, 18 South. 142; Rose v. State, 117 Ala. 77, 23 South. 638; Bell v. State, 48 Ala. 684, 17 Am. Rep. 40; Adams v. State, 55 Ala. 143.

No error being found in the record, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Affirmed.'

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

Hughes v. State, 66 So. 844, 11 Ala. App. 307, 1914 Ala. App. LEXIS 70 (Ala. Ct. App. 1914).

66 So. 844 (Hughes v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wiggins v. State
12 So. 2d 758 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1943)
Sexton v. State
127 So. 499 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1930)
Lauren v. State
97 So. 257 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1923)