Walton v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Walton v. State

161 So. 922, 26 Ala. App. 698

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 14, 1935

Docket3 Div. 758.

StatusPublished

This text of 161 So. 922 (Walton 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

Walton v. State, 161 So. 922, 26 Ala. App. 698 (Ala. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, Presiding Judge.

The indictment in this case charged the appellant with the offense of burglary. Specifically, that with intent to steal he broke into and entered the storehouse of F. C. Middleton, in which goods,, merchandise, or clothing, things of value, were kept for usé, sale, or deposit, etc. The record shows that before entering upon the trial in the court below, the defendant moved to quash the indictment, which motion was overruled, and defendant excepted. So far as we can ascertain from the record, there was no error in this ruling. No grounds of the motion, or other insistence, is contained in the record. The defendant was tried and convicted, “as bhargeü in the indictment,” and ‘the court duly sentenced *923 him to serve an indeterminate term of imprisonment in the penitentiary as the law requires. Judgment of conviction was properly pronounced and entered, from which this appeal was taken.

No error appears in any ruling of the lower court upon the trial of this case. The record also is free from error. It follows that the judgment of conviction from which this appeal was taken must be, and is, affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

BRICKEN, Presiding Judge.

The indictment in this case charged the appellant with the offense of burglary. Specifically, that with intent to steal he broke into and entered the storehouse of F. C. Middleton, in which goods,, merchandise, or clothing, things of value, were kept for usé, sale, or deposit, etc. The record shows that before entering upon the trial in the court below, the defendant moved to quash the indictment, which motion was overruled, and defendant excepted. So far as we can ascertain from the record, there was no error in this ruling. No grounds of the motion, or other insistence, is contained in the record. The defendant was tried and convicted, “as bhargeü in the indictment,” and ‘the court duly sentenced *923 him to serve an indeterminate term of imprisonment in the penitentiary as the law requires. Judgment of conviction was properly pronounced and entered, from which this appeal was taken.

No error appears in any ruling of the lower court upon the trial of this case. The record also is free from error. It follows that the judgment of conviction from which this appeal was taken must be, and is, affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

161 So. 922, 26 Ala. App. 698, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walton-v-state-alactapp-1935.