Richey v. State

76 So. 471, 16 Ala. App. 187, 1917 Ala. App. LEXIS 244
CourtAlabama Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 30, 1917
Docket7 Div. 450.
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 76 So. 471 (Richey 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
Richey v. State, 76 So. 471, 16 Ala. App. 187, 1917 Ala. App. LEXIS 244 (Ala. Ct. App. 1917).

Opinion

BRICKEN, J.

The defendant was indicted for seduction. The indictment changes that Ed Richey, alias, etc., a man, did, by means of temptation, deception, arts, flattery, or promise of marriage, seduce Margarte Tidwell, an unmarried woman, against the peace and dignity of the state of Alabama. The defendant was convicted on October 16, 1916. The appeal was taken on October 18, 1916. The time for signing and filing:' of the bill of exceptions having expired, arid there appearing no bill of exceptions in the record,' this court will not review the given and refused charges. Mitchell v. State, 15 Ala. App. 109, 72 South. 507; Paitry v. State, 196 Ala. 598, 72 South. 36.

The record is without error, and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Affirmed'.

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

Related

Thomas v. State
103 So. 479 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1925)
Winchester v. State
102 So. 595 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1925)
Motley v. State
102 So. 924 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1924)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
76 So. 471, 16 Ala. App. 187, 1917 Ala. App. LEXIS 244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richey-v-state-alactapp-1917.