Nettles v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Nettles v. State

106 So. 512, 21 Ala. App. 190, 1925 Ala. App. LEXIS 322

Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided December 8, 1925·No. 1 Div. 622.·Published

Opinion

RICE, J.

The defendants were jointly indicted, tried, and convicted of the offense of violating the prohibition laws by selling prohibited liquor or having it in their possession, and appeal.

There is no merit in the exception reserved to the action of the trial court in ordering a severance as to Clarence Johnson, jointly indicted with defendants, but who had not been apprehended at the time of the trial. It was a matter within the sound discretion of the court. Charley v. State, 204 Ala. 687. 87 So. 177.

There is no bill of exceptions, and, no error being apparent on the record, the judgment is affirmed.

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

RICE, J.

The defendants were jointly indicted, tried, and convicted of the offense of violating the prohibition laws by selling prohibited liquor or having it in their possession, and appeal.

There is no merit in the exception reserved to the action of the trial court in ordering a severance as to Clarence Johnson, jointly indicted with defendants, but who had not been apprehended at the time of the trial. It was a matter within the sound discretion of the court. Charley v. State, 204 Ala. 687. 87 So. 177.

There is no bill of exceptions, and, no error being apparent on the record, the judgment is affirmed.

Nettles v. State, 106 So. 512, 21 Ala. App. 190, 1925 Ala. App. LEXIS 322 (Ala. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

106 So. 512 (Nettles v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related