Uptain v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Uptain v. State

101 So. 75, 20 Ala. App. 111, 1924 Ala. App. LEXIS 178

Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided June 3, 1924·No. 6 Div. 410.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

SAMEORD, J.

There are no sufficient exceptions to the rulings of the trial court to present any question to this court for consideration and review save the ruling of the court in denying the motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. The evidence offered on this motion, while material, was merely cumulative, and as such would not justify the trial court in setting aside the verdict of the jury nor authorize this court in reversing the case. Grissett v. State, 18 Ala. App. 675, 94 South. 271.

There is no error in the record, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

SAMEORD, J.

There are no sufficient exceptions to the rulings of the trial court to present any question to this court for consideration and review save the ruling of the court in denying the motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. The evidence offered on this motion, while material, was merely cumulative, and as such would not justify the trial court in setting aside the verdict of the jury nor authorize this court in reversing the case. Grissett v. State, 18 Ala. App. 675, 94 South. 271.

There is no error in the record, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Uptain v. State, 101 So. 75, 20 Ala. App. 111, 1924 Ala. App. LEXIS 178 (Ala. Ct. App. 1924).

Pincite

101 So. 75 (Uptain v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related