Lackey v. State
12 So. 2d 352, 31 Ala. App. 71
Opinion
The defendant pleaded guilty to the offense of violating the State prohibition law, and from a judgment and sentence, which he contends was excessive and unwarranted, this appeal was taken. There is no bill of exceptions.
The punishment was within the limits prescribed by the statute and, from aught we can say, it was justified. The judgment, therefore, must be affirmed. Johnson v. State, 24 Ala.App. 291, 135 So. 592; Rutland v. State, ante, p. 43, 11 So.2d 768.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Lackey v. State, 12 So. 2d 352, 31 Ala. App. 71 (Ala. Ct. App. 1943).
12 So. 2d 352 (Lackey v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Johnson v. State
135 So. 592 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1931)
Rutland v. State
11 So. 2d 768 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1943)