Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

151 Ala. 18

Trammell v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided June 6, 1907

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1907-06-06

Heard before Hon. A. I-I. Alston. Hugh Trammell was convicted of murder in the 2nd degree and appeals. The grand jury finding the indictment was not properly organized and the indictment is void. — -Section 5023, Code 1896; Gross v. The State, 63 Ala. 40; Berry v. The State, 63 Ala. 127; Peters v. The State, 98 Ala. 38. This question may be raised for the first time on appeal. — Finlay v. The State, 61 Ala. 201; Hall v. The State, 134 Ala. 90.

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently June 1924

3 state decisions

Relies on Hall v. State · Finley v. State · Peters v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed and remanded · Decided 1907-06-06

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

DOWDELL, J.

¶1It affirmatively appears of record that the grand jury by which the indictment was found and returned in this case Avas illegally constituted. The original venire consisted of 18 persons, all of whom appeared and Avere ascertained by the court to possess the necessary qualifications, and all Avere thereupon duly and legally sworn in as grand jurors. Subsequently 3 of said grand jurors were excused by the court, Avhich left 15 of the original venire. With the 15 remaining— the minimum number under the statute — it was still a legally constituted grand jury. The court, hOAvever, after having excused the 3, and Avhile 15 yet remained, caused 4 other persons to be called and sworn as grand jurors and added to this number. This Avas Avithout authority of Iuav, and rendered the grand jury so constituted an illegal body, and consequently the indictmnet returned by it, and upon which the defendant Avas tried, Avas a nullity. — Section 5023, Cr. Code 1896; Perry v. State, 63 Ala. 126; Peters v. State, 98 Ala. 38, 13 South. 334.

¶2The objection is available on appeal, although not raised on the trial in the circuit court. Finley v. State, 61 Ala. 201; Hall v. State, 134 Ala. 90, 32 South. 750 Other questions presented need not now be considered, as they may not arise on another trial.

¶3*20For the error pointed out, the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded. The defendant will be held to answer a new indictment, and until discharged according to law.

¶4Reversed and remanded.

Tyson, C. J., and Anderson and McClellan, JJ,, concur.
/151/ala/18 · .json · Public domain