Robinson v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Robinson v. State

129 So. 717, 24 Ala. App. 29, 1930 Ala. App. LEXIS 224

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 4, 1930

Docket8 Div. 858.

StatusPublished

This text of 129 So. 717 (Robinson 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

Robinson v. State, 129 So. 717, 24 Ala. App. 29, 1930 Ala. App. LEXIS 224 (Ala. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinions

*31 RICE, J.

Appellant was convicted of the offense known as “Obtaining Property by false pretenses.” The value of the goods obtained being more than $25, he was punished as for grand larceny. Code 1923, §§ 4131, 4905.

The indictment followed the form prescribed by the Code (Code 1923, § 4556, form 58), and was sufficient as against demurrer (Code 1923, § 4527).

It appearing that there was no record of appellant’s employment at the shops of the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company, during the time inquired about, allowing the witness Maury, the chief clerk, “in charge of the entire department” to so testify, did not violate any rule of evidence. United Order of the Golden Cross v. Hooser, 160 Ala. 334, 49 So. 354.

We have searched the record diligently for prejudicial error, but, finding none, the judgment must.be, and is, affirmed.

Affirmed.

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