Ross v. State
55 Ala. 177
Opinion
Tbe Circuit Court- did not err in allowing tbe amendment of tbe indictment, so as to set forth tbe correct name and description of tbe person, whose property was alleged to have been stolen. — Revised Code, § 4143; Martha v. The State, 26 Ala. 72.
Tbe judgment is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Ross v. State, 55 Ala. 177 (Ala. 1876).
55 Ala. 177 (Ross v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. Fain
484 So. 2d 558 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1986)
Scott v. State
227 So. 2d 436 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1969)
Conley v. United States
59 F.2d 929 (Eighth Circuit, 1932)
People v. Capestany
37 P.R. 547 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1928)
Pueblo v. Capestany
37 P.R. Dec. 586 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1928)
Patrick v. Commonwealth
244 S.W. 72 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1922)
State v. Simpson
76 N.E. 544 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1906)
Stone v. State
105 Ala. 60 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1894)
Reynolds v. State
92 Ala. 44 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1890)