James v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

James v. State

78 So. 316, 16 Ala. App. 400, 1918 Ala. App. LEXIS 79

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 26, 1918

Docket6 Div. 368.

StatusPublished

This text of 78 So. 316 (James 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

James v. State, 78 So. 316, 16 Ala. App. 400, 1918 Ala. App. LEXIS 79 (Ala. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

SAMFORD, J.

[1] The defendant filed' her plea of former jeopardy, and contends that the issue on this plea should have been determined by the court before other proceedings were had. This is the proper practice, but where the defendant interposes both the plea of former jeopardy and not guilty in case of misdemeanor, and goes to trial' on both at the same time, as was done in this-case, without objection, he waives the irregularity. Dominick v. State, 40 Ala. 680, 91 Am. Dec. 496.

[2] After filing the plea of former jeopardy, the defendant filed a plea of misnomer,, alleging that her true name was Lee Anna James and not Leona Gray, as alleged in the indictment, The affidavit charged Lee Anna *401 James, whose name is otherwise unknown. The plea was demurred to and the demurrer sustained. In this ruling the court was not in error. Oliveri v. State, 13 Ala. App. 348, 69 South. 359, and authorities there cited.

The questions of the plea of former jeopardy and of the guilt of the defendant vel non were questions of fact for the trial judge, upon the evidence, which was in conflict, and -we are not willing to say that the court erred in its findings.

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

Affirmed.

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