Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

158 Ala. 16

State v. Lacey

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 12, 1909

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1909-01-12

Heard before Hon. A. P. Longshore. Habeas corpus by Jake Lacy against the State to compel petitioner’s admittance to bail. From an order admitting petitioner to bail, the State appeals. The state has the right of appeal. — Sec. 6245, Code 1907; The State v. Durham, 139 Ala. 661; Toicn of Elba v. Rhodes, 142 Ala. 690; Burr v. Foster, 132 Ala. 41. This statute has been declared constitutional. — State v. Towery, 143 Ala. 48.

Relies on State v. Towery

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1909-01-12

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently August 1956

11 state decisions

40190919101920193019401950decided

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 →

ANDEBSON, J.

¶1That the state has the right to appeal in this case there can be no doubt. Section 6245 of the Code of 1907. It lias also been held that this right given the state does not violate the Constitution. State v. Towery, 143 Ala. 48, 39 South. 309.

¶2As has been repeatedly held by this court, where there is a conflict in the evidence and the judge below sees and hears the witnesses, his conclusion on the facts will not be disturbed, unless his finding is contrary to the great Aveight or preponderance of the evidence. It is insisted, by the state’s counsel that this rule should not apply in the case at bar, because the main Avitness for the state did not appear in person before the probate judge and his evidence Avas in writing. If all of the evidence considered by the probate judge was in AAuiting, then there might be merit- in counsel’s insistence; but all the witnesses save Piper did appear and testify in person, and the probate judge saw and heard them, and Ave are not prepared to reverse his order admitting the petitioner to bail.

¶3Affirmed.

Haralson, Simpson and Denson. JJ., concur.
/158/ala/16 · .json · Public domain