Williams v. State

114 So. 567, 22 Ala. App. 262, 1927 Ala. App. LEXIS 166
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Williams v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 21 Ala. App. 227
Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided November 29, 1927·No. 1 Div. 758.·Published

Opinion

RICE, J.

This was a prosecution, purporting'to be begun by indictment, for the offense of distilling prohibited liquors, or for unlawfully having in possession a still, etc.

The record presents no evidence that the indictment upon which the defendant was tried was regularly and legally returned into court. It is not shown to be a valid indictment, in that it is not shown to have been indorsed “a true bill,” nor does it appear to have been signed by the foreman of the grand jury. Code 1923, § 8682; Bilbo v. State, 1 Ala. App. 74, 55 So. 927.

We can do nothing but reverse the judgment of conviction.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Williams v. State, 114 So. 567, 22 Ala. App. 262, 1927 Ala. App. LEXIS 166 (Ala. Ct. App. 1927).

114 So. 567 (Williams v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bilbo v. State
55 So. 927 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1911)