Ireland v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Ireland v. State

65 So. 443, 11 Ala. App. 155, 1914 Ala. App. LEXIS 26

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 14, 1914

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 65 So. 443 (Ireland 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

Ireland v. State, 65 So. 443, 11 Ala. App. 155, 1914 Ala. App. LEXIS 26 (Ala. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

THOMAS, J.

The defendant was indicted for petit larceny, and under the provisions of the act establishing the criminal court of Jefferson county (Acts 1886-87, p. 838, § 13) he waived a jury trial and was thereupon tried and convicted by the court. His counsel insist that the section of the act cited, permitting the defendant to waive a jury trial, is unconstitutional and void, as being violative of section 6 of our Bill of Rights. It has become too well settled by the decisions of this state that the Legislature might provide for a waiver of the right of trial by jury in misdemeanor cases, as this is, without running counter to the constitutional provisions cited, to now admit of controversy. — Connelly v. State, 60 Ala. 89, 31 Am. Rep. 34; Moore v. State, 68 Ala. 361; Summers v. State, 70 Ala. 16; Collins v. State, 88 Ala. 214, 7 South. 260; Reeves v. State, 96 Ala. 39, 11 South. 296; Dean v. State, 100 Ala. 104, 14 South. 762; McClellan v. State, 118 Ala. 124, 23 South. 732; Lewis v. State, 123 Ala. 86, 26 South. 516; Frost v. State, 124 Ala. 87, 27 South. 251; Ex parte State, ex rel. Wood, 151 Ala. 575, 576, 44 South. 635; Ex parte O’Neal, 154 Ala. 240, 45 South. 712; Redd v. State, 169 Ala. 9, 53 South. 908; Alford v. State, ex rel. Atty. Gen., 170 Ala. 195, 228, 54 South. 213, Ann. Cas. 1912C, 1093.

It is also well settled that the failure of a defendant in a misdemeanor case to demand a jury trial within the [157]*157time prescribed by the statute here under consideration is a waiver of a jury trial. — Redd v. State, 169 Ala. 9, 53 South. 908.

We find no error in the record, and the judgment of conviction is accordingly affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

THOMAS, J.

The defendant was indicted for petit larceny, and under the provisions of the act establishing the criminal court of Jefferson county (Acts 1886-87, p. 838, § 13) he waived a jury trial and was thereupon tried and convicted by the court. His counsel insist that the section of the act cited, permitting the defendant to waive a jury trial, is unconstitutional and void, as being violative of section 6 of our Bill of Rights. It has become too well settled by the decisions of this state that the Legislature might provide for a waiver of the right of trial by jury in misdemeanor cases, as this is, without running counter to the constitutional provisions cited, to now admit of controversy. — Connelly v. State, 60 Ala. 89, 31 Am. Rep. 34; Moore v. State, 68 Ala. 361; Summers v. State, 70 Ala. 16; Collins v. State, 88 Ala. 214, 7 South. 260; Reeves v. State, 96 Ala. 39, 11 South. 296; Dean v. State, 100 Ala. 104, 14 South. 762; McClellan v. State, 118 Ala. 124, 23 South. 732; Lewis v. State, 123 Ala. 86, 26 South. 516; Frost v. State, 124 Ala. 87, 27 South. 251; Ex parte State, ex rel. Wood, 151 Ala. 575, 576, 44 South. 635; Ex parte O’Neal, 154 Ala. 240, 45 South. 712; Redd v. State, 169 Ala. 9, 53 South. 908; Alford v. State, ex rel. Atty. Gen., 170 Ala. 195, 228, 54 South. 213, Ann. Cas. 1912C, 1093.

It is also well settled that the failure of a defendant in a misdemeanor case to demand a jury trial within the [157]*157time prescribed by the statute here under consideration is a waiver of a jury trial. — Redd v. State, 169 Ala. 9, 53 South. 908.

We find no error in the record, and the judgment of conviction is accordingly affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 So. 443, 11 Ala. App. 155, 1914 Ala. App. LEXIS 26, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ireland-v-state-alactapp-1914.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack