Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

136 Ala. 129

Davis v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided November 15, 1902

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1902-11-15

■ Appeal from the Circuit Court of Clarke. Tried before the Hon.' John C. Anderson. The appellant in this case, Clarence Daris, was indicted, tried and convicted for carrying a pistol concealed about his person.' The facts of the case necessary to an understanding of the decision on the present appeal, are sufficiently stated in the opinion. cited Toulmin v. State, 2 Ala. 359; Truun v. Wittick, 27 Ala. 571; Grice v. Ferguson, 1 Stew. 36; Dominick v. State, 40 Ala. 690.

Relies on Dominick v. State · Moody v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1902-11-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently June 1949

7 state decisions

3019021910192019301940decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

DOWDELL, J.

¶1This cause was submitted to the jury upon the plea of misnomer and the plea of not guilty at one and the same time, and both issues were tried" together. The jury returned a verdict of guilty and assessed a fine of fifty dollars, saying nothing in their verdict as to the issue under the plea of misnomer. The verdict was not responsive to both issues. The defendant had a right to have the jury pass upon his plea of misnomer, and this was not done by the verdict rendered. This case can not in principle be distinguished from the cases of Moody v. State, 60 Ala. 78, and Dominick v. State, 40 Ala. 680. On the authority of these two cases the judgment must be reversed. The general rule is, that the filing of a plea in bar is a waiver of a former plea in abatement. But it affirmatively appears here from the record that the. two issues were submitted together by consent, and that there was no waiver of the plea in abatement. The practice of submitting two distinct issues in a criminal case together, as was done in this case, is irregular, and not to be approved.

¶2Reversed and remanded.

/136/ala/129 · .json · Public domain