Whitaker v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Whitaker v. State

131 So. 928, 24 Ala. App. 695

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 16, 1930

Docket5 Div. 777.

StatusPublished

This text of 131 So. 928 (Whitaker 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

Whitaker v. State, 131 So. 928, 24 Ala. App. 695 (Ala. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, P. J.

This appellant was indicted, tried, and convicted under a general verdict of the jury, their verdict being: “We the jury find the defendant guilty as charged in the indictment.” In accordance with the verdict, the court sentenced the defendant to imprisonment in the penitentiary for not less than two years and not more than two years and six months. From the judgment of conviction, this appeal was taken.

No brief has been filed in behalf of appellant, but we gather from the record that the ruling of the court in denying defendant’s motion for a new trial is relied upon principally to effect a reversal. Other than this, but one exception was reserved pending the trial. The ruling of the court in each instance is so clearly free from error, no discussion is necessary. The record proper is regular in all *696 things. The judgment of conviction from which this appeal was taken will stand affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

BRICKEN, P. J.

This appellant was indicted, tried, and convicted under a general verdict of the jury, their verdict being: “We the jury find the defendant guilty as charged in the indictment.” In accordance with the verdict, the court sentenced the defendant to imprisonment in the penitentiary for not less than two years and not more than two years and six months. From the judgment of conviction, this appeal was taken.

No brief has been filed in behalf of appellant, but we gather from the record that the ruling of the court in denying defendant’s motion for a new trial is relied upon principally to effect a reversal. Other than this, but one exception was reserved pending the trial. The ruling of the court in each instance is so clearly free from error, no discussion is necessary. The record proper is regular in all *696 things. The judgment of conviction from which this appeal was taken will stand affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

131 So. 928, 24 Ala. App. 695, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whitaker-v-state-alactapp-1930.