Melton v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Melton v. State

121 So. 443, 23 Ala. App. 90, 1929 Ala. App. LEXIS 79

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 26, 1929

Docket8 Div. 779.

StatusPublished

This text of 121 So. 443 (Melton 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

Melton v. State, 121 So. 443, 23 Ala. App. 90, 1929 Ala. App. LEXIS 79 (Ala. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

SAMEORD, J.

When there is a difference in the recitals in the record proper and the bill of exceptions, the recitals in the record proper must govern in all matters properly appearing in the record proper. Bruce v. Citizens’ National Bank, 185 Ala. 221, 64 So. 82; McDaniel v. State, 10 Ala. App. 79, 64 So. 641. The record proper shows that affidavit filed September 11, 1928, was an amendment of the original affidavit made 'September 10,1927, and on which the warrant was issued.

The rulings of the court respecting the affidavit are affirmed on the authority of Bell v. State, 21 Ala. App. 550, 109 So. 900; Richardson v. State, 21 Ala. App. 639, 111 So. 202. In the Bowen Case, 21 Ala. App. 547, 110 So. 56, the affidavit was void and charged no offense, and the same was true in Barnes v. City of Huntsville, 18 Ala. App. 646, 94 So. 188.

The right to file a plea of misnomer was waived. McBride v. State, 19 Ala. App. 471, 98 So. 135.

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