Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

204 Ala. 476

85 So 789

Anderson v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided June 30, 1920

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1920-06-30

<p>Criminal law <&wkey;l 104(3) — Order for .special venire need not appear in transcript in absence of question raised in court beiow as to its validity.</p> <p>Where no question was raised in the court below as to the validity of a special venire, it was unnecessary that the order for the special venire appear in the transcript upon appeal, under Acts 1915, p. 708, and Supreme Court rule 27, as amended (198 Ala. xv, 77 South, vii).</p> <p>Sayre and Brown, JJ., dissenting.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1920-06-30

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently April 1988 · most notably Anderson v. State (1922), 49 Ala. App. 233 - Thigpen v. State (1972)

43 state decisions

1601920193019401950196019701980decided

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 →

GARDNER, J.

¶1 Appellant was convicted of murder in the first degree, and sentenced to life imprisonment in the penitentiary. The appeal is upon the record only, there being no bill of exceptions.

¶2 The order for the special venire is similar to that found in Duff Walker v. State, 85 South. 787, 1 present term, which determines this question adversely to appellant. But, in addition to this, there was in the instant case no question raised in the court below as to the venire in any manner, and under the provisions of Acts 1915. p. 708, and Supreme Court rule 27 as amended (198 Ala. xv, 77 South, vii), it wag unnecessary that the order appear in the transcript upon this appeal.

¶3 No other matter appearing in the transcript calls for comment. Suffice it to say, an examination of the record discloses no reversible error, and the judgment of conviction will be-affirmed.

¶4 Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and MeCLEDLAN, SOMERVILLE, and THOMAS, JJ., concur. SAYRE and BROWN, JJ., dissent.
1

¶5 AnteJ p 474.

/204/ala/476 · .json · Public domain