Owens v. State

Decided November 24, 1914

Alabama Court of Appeals · decided 1914-11-24

Heard before Hon. O. J. Semmes. Jobnnie Owens was convicted of grand larceny and he appeals. The bill of exceptions violates rule 32 Circuit Court Practice, and should be stricken. It should be stricken also because not filed within 90 days.- — -Sec. 3019, Code 1907.

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently June 1918

3 state decisions

Relies on Hester v. Cantrell · Tuggle v. Wilson

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1914-11-24

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

BROWN, J.

¶1This case was submitted on the motion of the Attorney General to strike the bill of exceptions and on the merits.

¶2The bill of exceptions is nothing more than a catechismal stenographic report of the trial, embodying the testimony of the witnesses and the remarks of counsel and of the court, in patent violation of rule 32 of circuit court practice. — Civil Code 1907, p. 1526; Hester v. Cantrell, 169 Ala. 490, 53 South. 1009.

¶3 *310In addition to this, as a canse for striking the bill of exceptions, it was not presented to the trial judge within 90 days from the rendition of the judgment.- — Code 1907, 3019; Tuggle v. Wilson, 179 Ala. 671, 60 South. 391.

¶4The motion to strike the bill of exceptions is granted, and, there being no error apparent upon the record, the judgment of the city court is affirmed.

¶5Affirmed.