Stanley v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Stanley v. State

110 So. 926, 21 Ala. App. 695

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Stanley v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 20 Ala. App. 387 →

Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided December 7, 1926·No. 6 Div. 966.·Published

Opinion

BRICKEN, P. J.

Upon arraignment in the circuit court on a charge of violating the prohibition law, the defendant interposed a plea of guilty; but, notwithstanding this plea, when judgment was pronounced and entered, he appealed therefrom to this court. It is evident that this appeal is for delay only. No points of decision are involved, as there is no bill of exceptions, and the record upon which the appeal is predicated is clearly without error. Affirmed.

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

BRICKEN, P. J.

Upon arraignment in the circuit court on a charge of violating the prohibition law, the defendant interposed a plea of guilty; but, notwithstanding this plea, when judgment was pronounced and entered, he appealed therefrom to this court. It is evident that this appeal is for delay only. No points of decision are involved, as there is no bill of exceptions, and the record upon which the appeal is predicated is clearly without error. Affirmed.

Stanley v. State, 110 So. 926, 21 Ala. App. 695 (Ala. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

110 So. 926 (Stanley v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.