Rorex v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Rorex v. State

203 So. 2d 294, 44 Ala. App. 112, 1967 Ala. App. LEXIS 433

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 17, 1967

Docket8 Div. 129

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 203 So. 2d 294 (Rorex 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

Rorex v. State, 203 So. 2d 294, 44 Ala. App. 112, 1967 Ala. App. LEXIS 433 (Ala. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

JOHNSON, Judge.

We have carefully examined the record in this cause and the same reflects that there was no arraignment of the appellant and, therefore, no plea to this charge was entered by him or for him. Consequently, the “adjudication of guilt” by the lower court is without legal force or effect.

Presiding Judge Bricken, speaking for this court in Chesnut v. State, 35 Ala. App. 376, 47 So.2d 248, stated in part as follows:

“There can be no trial on the merits in a criminal case until the defendant has pleaded not guilty, or this plea has been entered for him by the court; Jackson v. State, 91 Ala. 55, 8 So. 773, 24 Am.St. Rep. 860; Howard v. State, 165 Ala. 18, 50 So. 954; Bowen v. State, 98 Ala. 83, 12 So. 808; Childs v. State, 97 Ala. 49,12 So. 441.”

See also Huddleston v. State, 37 Ala.App. 57, 64 So.2d 90.

In view of the need for remandment we also point to the fact that the instant transcript of evidence fails to show a prima facie case of the appellant’s guilt under the statute in such case made and provided.

Reversed and remanded.

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