Clements v. State

Decided December 19, 1916

Alabama Court of Appeals · decided 1916-12-19

<p>Violating Prohibition Law.</p> <p>Appeal and Error; Review; Instructions; Bill of Exceptions. — The appellate court cannot properly review the refusal of instructions, especially the affirmative charge for defendant, in the absence of a bill of exceptions containing the evidence in the case.</p>

Relies on Clay v. State · Frazier v. State

Affirmed · Decided 1916-12-19

PELHAM, P. J.

¶1 The transcript in this case contains no bill of exceptions. The charge shown against the defendant is for violation of the prohibition laws. The record appears in all things regular. The general affirmative charges on the different counts in the indictment that are set out in the record cannot be intelligently considered or reviewed in the absence of a bill of exceptions and the oral charge of the court. — Frazier v. State, 14 Ala. App. 665, 71 South. 981; Clay v. State, 14 Ala. App. 664, 71 South. 982.

¶2 No error appearing in the record, an affirmance is ordered.

¶3 Affirmed.