Miles v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Miles v. State

126 So. 894, 23 Ala. App. 459, 1930 Ala. App. LEXIS 84

Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided March 18, 1930·No. 8 Div. 67.·Published

Opinion

RICE, J.

Appellant, according to the judgment entry contained in the record filed here on appeal, was convicted of the offense of violating the prohibition laws, and assessed a fine of $50. The said judgment entry recites that he was tried under an indictment, etc. But there i^ no indictment shown by the transcript.

Nor is there anything shown by said transcript which would authorizé the court to place appellant on trial, or to render judgment of conviction against him. It might be guessed that the appellant was convicted according to the due processes of law, but we are not warranted here in indulging in guesses.

The judgment of conviction is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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

RICE, J.

Appellant, according to the judgment entry contained in the record filed here on appeal, was convicted of the offense of violating the prohibition laws, and assessed a fine of $50. The said judgment entry recites that he was tried under an indictment, etc. But there i^ no indictment shown by the transcript.

Nor is there anything shown by said transcript which would authorizé the court to place appellant on trial, or to render judgment of conviction against him. It might be guessed that the appellant was convicted according to the due processes of law, but we are not warranted here in indulging in guesses.

The judgment of conviction is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

Miles v. State, 126 So. 894, 23 Ala. App. 459, 1930 Ala. App. LEXIS 84 (Ala. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

126 So. 894 (Miles v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.