Parsons v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Parsons v. State

93 So. 336, 18 Ala. App. 545, 1922 Ala. App. LEXIS 211

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 9, 1922

Docket6 Div. 36.

StatusPublished

This text of 93 So. 336 (Parsons 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

Parsons v. State, 93 So. 336, 18 Ala. App. 545, 1922 Ala. App. LEXIS 211 (Ala. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

This defendant was tried and convicted under an indictment in which it was charged that he did distill, make, or manufacture alcoholic, spirituous, malted, or mixed liquors or beverages a part of which is alcoholic, etc.

This is a companion case with the case of Arthur Ellis v. State, 93 So. 334,¹ and counsel for appellant and the state make it known to this court that the two cases were tried together, and, while separate verdicts were rendered in each case, yet in all other respects the two are identical, and that a decision in this court in one case will of necessity govern the decision in the other case. The appeal of Arthur Ellis v. State, the companion case, has been duly considered by this court, and a decision rendered therein, the opinion being prepared by Samford, J., of this court. On authority of that case, the judgment of conviction rendered against this defendant in the court below is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

¹ Ante, p. 544. *Page 546

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

This defendant was tried and convicted under an indictment in which it was charged that he did distill, make, or manufacture alcoholic, spirituous, malted, or mixed liquors or beverages a part of which is alcoholic, etc.

This is a companion case with the case of Arthur Ellis v. State, 93 So. 334,¹ and counsel for appellant and the state make it known to this court that the two cases were tried together, and, while separate verdicts were rendered in each case, yet in all other respects the two are identical, and that a decision in this court in one case will of necessity govern the decision in the other case. The appeal of Arthur Ellis v. State, the companion case, has been duly considered by this court, and a decision rendered therein, the opinion being prepared by Samford, J., of this court. On authority of that case, the judgment of conviction rendered against this defendant in the court below is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

¹ Ante, p. 544. *Page 546

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

93 So. 336, 18 Ala. App. 545, 1922 Ala. App. LEXIS 211, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parsons-v-state-alactapp-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack