Meinhardt v. State

114 So. 631, 22 Ala. App. 263, 1927 Ala. App. LEXIS 169
CourtAlabama Court of Appeals
DecidedNovember 29, 1927
Docket1 Div. 733.
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 114 So. 631 (Meinhardt 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
Meinhardt v. State, 114 So. 631, 22 Ala. App. 263, 1927 Ala. App. LEXIS 169 (Ala. Ct. App. 1927).

Opinion

BRICKEN, P. J.

This appellant was indicted, tried, and convicted of the offense of violating the state quarantine laws for live stock. The jury assessed a fine of $10, and judgment of conviction was accordingly pronounced and entered.

There is no bill of exceptions; the appeal is predicated upon the record proper. So far as the judgment of conviction is concerned, the cause will be affirmed; but, as there appears no sentence of the court relative to the costs incident upon the trial of this cause, it will of necessity be remanded for proper sentence. Code 1923, § 5291.

Affirmed. Remanded for proper sentence.

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

Related

Upshaw v. State
26 So. 2d 211 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1946)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
114 So. 631, 22 Ala. App. 263, 1927 Ala. App. LEXIS 169, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meinhardt-v-state-alactapp-1927.