White v. State

132 So. 181, 24 Ala. App. 184, 1931 Ala. App. LEXIS 192
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in White v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 25 Ala. App. 323
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided January 27, 1931·No. 7 Div. 801.·Published

Opinion

*185 RICE, J.

Appellant was convicted of the offense of violating what has become to be known as the Five Gallon Law, i. e. transporting prohibited liquors in quantities of five gallons or more. Gen. Acts 1927, p. 704.

There was no conflict in the evidence; none being offered on behalf of appellant. That for the state was clear, direct, and positive to the effect that appellant was guilty as charged.

The written charge appearing in the transcript, the giving of which, on behalf of the state, is made the basis of complaint by appellant’s resourceful counsel, in his brief filed here, is not indorsed by the trial judge, as is required by Code 1923, § 9509. “Not being so indorsed, and therefore not a part of the record, [it] cannot be considered.” Sharpley v. State, 18 Ala. App. 620, 93 So. 210, 211.

Observing nowhere any prejudicial error, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

White v. State, 132 So. 181, 24 Ala. App. 184, 1931 Ala. App. LEXIS 192 (Ala. Ct. App. 1931).

132 So. 181 (White v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sharpley v. State
93 So. 210 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1922)