Robin v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Robin v. State

40 Ala. 72

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedJune 15, 1866

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 40 Ala. 72 (Robin v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Robin v. State, 40 Ala. 72 (Ala. 1866).

Pincite

Opinion

EYED, J.

-The indictment was found at a special term of the circuit court of Tuskaloosa county, held on the 27th November, 1865. There is no bill of exceptions, and the cause is brought here on writ of error. The first count in the indictment is good. The verdict is general. The proceedings are regular, unless the failure to ask the prisoner, before sentence, what he had to say why the sentence of the law should not be pronounced, is erroneous ; and this question is settled adversely to the defendant in the case of Aaron & Ely v. The State, at the last term, and authorities there referred to.

[2.] The defendant made a motion in arrest of judgment, and set up several distinct and sufficient grounds; but there is no bill of exceptions setting forth any evidence to support them, nor any exception to the ruling of the court on the motion. In this condition of the record, we must [74]*74presume that the court acted correctly in overruling the motion.—See Paris v. The State, 36 Ala. 232.

As there is no error in the record, let the judgment be affirmed.

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

EYED, J.

-The indictment was found at a special term of the circuit court of Tuskaloosa county, held on the 27th November, 1865. There is no bill of exceptions, and the cause is brought here on writ of error. The first count in the indictment is good. The verdict is general. The proceedings are regular, unless the failure to ask the prisoner, before sentence, what he had to say why the sentence of the law should not be pronounced, is erroneous ; and this question is settled adversely to the defendant in the case of Aaron & Ely v. The State, at the last term, and authorities there referred to.

[2.] The defendant made a motion in arrest of judgment, and set up several distinct and sufficient grounds; but there is no bill of exceptions setting forth any evidence to support them, nor any exception to the ruling of the court on the motion. In this condition of the record, we must [74]*74presume that the court acted correctly in overruling the motion.—See Paris v. The State, 36 Ala. 232.

As there is no error in the record, let the judgment be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 Ala. 72, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robin-v-state-ala-1866.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack