Kabase v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Kabase v. State

12 So. 2d 766, 244 Ala. 182, 1943 Ala. LEXIS 166

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedMarch 25, 1943

Docket6 Div. 125.

StatusPublished

Cited by49 cases

This text of 12 So. 2d 766 (Kabase 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

Kabase v. State, 12 So. 2d 766, 244 Ala. 182, 1943 Ala. LEXIS 166 (Ala. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

GARDNER, Chief Justice.

Following the adoption of Supreme Court Rule 45, Code 1940, Tit. 7 Appendix, substantial error is not presumed, but the burden is upon the appellant to show error, and before a reversal of the judgment is to be had, it must appear to the Court that the error complained of has probably “injuriously affected substantial rights of the parties,” to use the language of the rule. Henderson v. Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. R. Co., 190 Ala. 126, 67 So. 414.

The opinion of the Court of Appeals cites approvingly Robinson v. State, 29 Ala.App. 47, 191 So. 649, containing an expression indicating a contrary view, which was corrected by this Court on review by certiorari (Robinson v. State, 238 Ala. 441, 191 So. 655) as appears from the concluding paragraph of the opinion. The Court of Appeals also cites Roan v. State, 225 Ala. 428, 143 So. 454. But what was there said is to be interpreted in the light of the question being considered — the granting of a new trial for “outside” interference with the jury in the matter of their deliberation on the verdict. That authority, therefore, is inaptly cited upon the question presented on this appeal.

We find no further reason for any criticism of the opinion of the Court of Appeals and conclude that the writ of certiorari is due to be denied. It is so ordered.

Writ denied.

BOULDIN, FOSTER, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.

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

GARDNER, Chief Justice.

Following the adoption of Supreme Court Rule 45, Code 1940, Tit. 7 Appendix, substantial error is not presumed, but the burden is upon the appellant to show error, and before a reversal of the judgment is to be had, it must appear to the Court that the error complained of has probably “injuriously affected substantial rights of the parties,” to use the language of the rule. Henderson v. Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. R. Co., 190 Ala. 126, 67 So. 414.

The opinion of the Court of Appeals cites approvingly Robinson v. State, 29 Ala.App. 47, 191 So. 649, containing an expression indicating a contrary view, which was corrected by this Court on review by certiorari (Robinson v. State, 238 Ala. 441, 191 So. 655) as appears from the concluding paragraph of the opinion. The Court of Appeals also cites Roan v. State, 225 Ala. 428, 143 So. 454. But what was there said is to be interpreted in the light of the question being considered — the granting of a new trial for “outside” interference with the jury in the matter of their deliberation on the verdict. That authority, therefore, is inaptly cited upon the question presented on this appeal.

We find no further reason for any criticism of the opinion of the Court of Appeals and conclude that the writ of certiorari is due to be denied. It is so ordered.

Writ denied.

BOULDIN, FOSTER, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 So. 2d 766, 244 Ala. 182, 1943 Ala. LEXIS 166, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kabase-v-state-ala-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack