Sales v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Sales v. State

155 So. 923, 26 Ala. App. 683

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 5, 1934

Docket8 Div. 933.

StatusPublished

This text of 155 So. 923 (Sales 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

Sales v. State, 155 So. 923, 26 Ala. App. 683 (Ala. Ct. App. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

RICE, Judge.

It is sufficient, in disposing of this appeal, to say that the court has examined the proceedings, including the bill of exceptions, sitting en ban?;, and that it is our opinion that there is no testimony tending to show the violation of any law.

To the contrary, the state’s testimony shows that no law was violated. It should have been excluded upon appellant’s motion, duly made.

For the error committed in overruling said motion, the judgment of conviction is reversed ; and, it appearing as aforesaid herein, it is ordered that appellant be discharged.

Reversed and rendered.

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

RICE, Judge.

It is sufficient, in disposing of this appeal, to say that the court has examined the proceedings, including the bill of exceptions, sitting en ban?;, and that it is our opinion that there is no testimony tending to show the violation of any law.

To the contrary, the state’s testimony shows that no law was violated. It should have been excluded upon appellant’s motion, duly made.

For the error committed in overruling said motion, the judgment of conviction is reversed ; and, it appearing as aforesaid herein, it is ordered that appellant be discharged.

Reversed and rendered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

155 So. 923, 26 Ala. App. 683, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sales-v-state-alactapp-1934.