Norman v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Norman v. State

98 So. 2d 68, 39 Ala. App. 291

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 29, 1957

Docket6 Div. 440

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 98 So. 2d 68 (Norman 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

Norman v. State, 98 So. 2d 68, 39 Ala. App. 291 (Ala. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

CATES, Judge.

Norman was, on June 18, 1956, adjudged guilty of carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of twelve.

He failed to present his motion for another trial to the trial judge until 31 days after judgment, thus rendering the motion and the action thereon a nullity, Clark v. State, 38 Ala.App. 480, 87 So.2d 669; Aaron v. State, ante, p. 84, 94 So.2d 415.

Calculating the time for filing the transcript of testimony from June 18, 1956, gave Norman 60 days (Act No. 97, approved February 9, 1956). The filing on August 31 was too late.

Moreover, under Rule 37 (Rev.) of the Supreme Court, Code 1940, Tit. 7 Appendix, viewed most charitably, the filing of the entire record on November 16, 1956, was tardy.

Hence, the motion of the Attorney General to strike the record and dismiss the appeal is proper, Aaron v. State, supra. See also Duke v. State, 264 Ala. 624, 89 So.2d 102; Lane v. State, 38 Ala.App. 487, 87 So.2d 668; King v. State, ante, p. 167, 98 So.2d 443; Lyons v. State, 38 Ala.App. 639, 91 So.2d 520; Brown v. State, 38 Ala.App. 638, 91 So.2d 514.

Record stricken. Appeal dismissed.

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