From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Trawick v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama
Jan 12, 1928
115 So. 79 (Ala. 1928)

Opinion

4 Div. 364.

January 12, 1928.

Guy W. Winn, of Clayton, for petitioner.

There was no evidence against the defendant and the affirmative charge requested by him should have been given. Ammons v. State, 20 Ala. App. 283, 101 So. 511; Hobdy v. State, 20 Ala. App. 44, 100 So. 571; Moultrie v. State, 20 Ala. App. 258, 101 So. 335. Where there is no evidence connecting the defendant with the crime charged, this presents a question of law which will be reviewed by the Supreme Court on certiorari. Postal Co. v. Minderhout, 195 Ala. 420, 71 So. 91.

Charlie C. McCall, Atty. Gen., for the State.

Brief did not reach the Reporter.


The opinion of the Court of Appeals states that —

"The evidence in this record has been examined, and we find sufficient facts to authorize a jury in finding the defendant guilty as charged. We further are of the opinion that there is no reversible error in any of the rulings of the court."

Under the uniform decisions of this court, these findings, without more, preclude a review of the Court of Appeals by certiorari. Campbell v. State, 216 Ala. 295, 112 So. 902; Ex parte Steverson, 211 Ala. 597, 100 So. 912; Postal Tel.-Cable Co. v. Minderhout, 195 Ala. 420, 71 So. 91.

Writ denied.

ANDERSON, C. J., and SOMERVILLE and THOMAS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Trawick v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama
Jan 12, 1928
115 So. 79 (Ala. 1928)
Case details for

Trawick v. State

Case Details

Full title:TRAWICK v. STATE

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Jan 12, 1928

Citations

115 So. 79 (Ala. 1928)
115 So. 79

Citing Cases

Trawick v. State

Affirmed and remanded for proper sentence. Certiorari denied by Supreme Court in Trawick v. State, 217 Ala.…