Stansell v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Stansell v. State

105 So. 926, 21 Ala. App. 695

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 30, 1925

Docket6 Div. 720.

StatusPublished

This text of 105 So. 926 (Stansell 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

Stansell v. State, 105 So. 926, 21 Ala. App. 695 (Ala. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, P.‘ J.

The indictment charged appellant with the offense of unlawfully and recklessly operating a motor vehicle. The verdict of the jury was guilty as charged in the third count of the indictment, and assessed a fine of $50, to which the court added hard labor for the county for 30 days. From the judgment and sentence he appeals to this court. The cause here is submitted upon the record proper only, there being no bill of exceptions. An examination of this record shows it to be regular in all respects and without error. The judgment of conviction appealed from is affirmed. Affirmed.

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

BRICKEN, P.‘ J.

The indictment charged appellant with the offense of unlawfully and recklessly operating a motor vehicle. The verdict of the jury was guilty as charged in the third count of the indictment, and assessed a fine of $50, to which the court added hard labor for the county for 30 days. From the judgment and sentence he appeals to this court. The cause here is submitted upon the record proper only, there being no bill of exceptions. An examination of this record shows it to be regular in all respects and without error. The judgment of conviction appealed from is affirmed. Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 So. 926, 21 Ala. App. 695, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stansell-v-state-alactapp-1925.