Paitry v. State

Decided May 18, 1916

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1916-05-18

Murder. 1. Appeal and Error; Review; Record; Instructions. — In the absence of a bill of exceptions the appellate courts cannot intelligently review charges in writing requested by either party, although the charges are set out in the record proper. 2. Same; Transcript; Contents. — Where no question was raised before the trial court as to the order of the court for the special venire, or as fixing the day for the trial of defendant, the transcript on appeal should not contain such matters. (§ 6256, Code 1907, as amended by Acts 1915, p. 708.)

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1916-05-18

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently April 1934

15 state decisions

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 →

SOMERVILLE, J.—

¶1(1) The record in this case contains no bill of exceptions, and we cannot review the action of the trial court in refusing a number of written charges requested by the defendant and set out in the record proper.

¶2(2) This case was tried after September 22, 1915, and, under the provisions of the act approved on that date (Acts 1915, p. 708) amendatory of section 6256 of the Code, the transcript should not have contained the order of the court for the special, venire, or fixing the day for the trial of defendant; no question thereon being raised before the trial court. We call attention to this new rule of practice in order that.it may not be overlooked in future.

¶3We find no error on the record, and the judgment of conviction will be affirmed.

Anderson, C. J., and Mayfield and Thomas, JJ., concur.