Morris v. State

151 So. 888, 228 Ala. 84, 1933 Ala. LEXIS 10
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided November 2, 1933·No. 6 Div. 473.·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioners’ argument for the issuance of the writ of certiorari in the instant case runs counter to the rule that this court will not review the Court of Appeals on its finding of facts, Houston v. State (Ala. Sup.) 148 So 863; 1 Loveman, Joseph & Loeb v. Himrod, 226 Ala. 342, 147 So. 163; Postal Tel.-Cable *85 Co. v. Minderhout, 195 Ala. 420, 71 So. 91, nor on questions not treated or considered m the opinion of that court, Ballard v. State, 219 Ala. 222, 121 So. 502; Whisenant v. State, 223 Ala. 550, 137 So. 457.

In accordance with this long-established rule, the writ must be here denied.

Writ denied.

ANDERSON, C. .1., and GARDNER, BOULDIN, and FOSTER, JJ., concur.
1

227 Ala. 172.

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

Morris v. State, 151 So. 888, 228 Ala. 84, 1933 Ala. LEXIS 10 (Ala. 1933).

151 So. 888 (Morris v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Whisenant v. State
137 So. 457 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1931)
Ballard v. State
121 So. 502 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1929)
Loveman, Joseph & Loeb v. Himrod
147 So. 163 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1933)
Ballard v. State
121 So. 502 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1929)
Houston v. State
148 So. 863 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1933)
Postal Tel. Cable Co. v. Minderhout
71 So. 91 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1916)