Mack v. State
77 So. 683, 201 Ala. 269, 1918 Ala. LEXIS 216
Opinion
The appeal in this cause is upon the record proper. There being no bill of exceptions, we cannot review the action of the trial court, therefore, in refusing the written charges requested by the defendant, which are set out in the record. Paitry v. State, 196 Ala. 598, 72 South. 36.
We find no error on the record, and the judgment of conviction will be affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Mack v. State, 77 So. 683, 201 Ala. 269, 1918 Ala. LEXIS 216 (Ala. 1918).
77 So. 683 (Mack v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Penningham v. State
129 So. 486 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1930)
Jiles v. State
120 So. 147 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1929)
Thomas v. State
103 So. 479 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1925)
Winchester v. State
102 So. 595 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1925)
Motley v. State
102 So. 924 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1924)