Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

30 Ala. App. 599

10 So.2d 374

Griffin v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided November 3, 1942

Alabama Court of Appeals · decided 1942-11-03

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently March 1988

8 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““The driver of any motor vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to or the death of any person or damage to any vehicle which is driven or attended by any person shall give his name, address and the registration number of the vehicle he is driving, shall upon request exhibit his driver’s license to the person struck or the driver or occupant of or person attending any motor or other vehicle collided with or damaged and shall render to any person injured in such accident reasonable assistance, including the transportaion of, or the making of arrangements for the transportation of such person to a physician or hospital for medical or surgical treatment, if it is apparent that such treatment is necessary or if such transportation is requested by the injured person.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including Mayfield v. State

Relies on 24 Ala. App. 336 - State v. Hall

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1942-11-03

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

BRICKEN, Presiding Judge.

¶1 At the July 1941, term of the circuit court of Talladega, the grand jury found and returned into open court an indictment against the defendant as follows:

¶2 “The Grand Jury of said County charge that before the finding of this indictment, Charlie Griffin who was the driver of an automobile upon a public highway in Talladega County, Alabama, which said automobile was involved in an accident resulting in injury to a person, to-wit, June Gaul-din, or damage to property, did not give his name and address, and the registration license number of his automobile, and did not render to said injured person in said accident reasonable assistance, including the carrying of such person injured to a physician or surgeon for medical or surgical treatment, it being apparent that such treatment was necessary or was requested by such injured person or did not immediately stop such automobile at the scene of such accident, against the peace and dignity of the State of Alabama.”

¶3 Upon arraignment, and before pleading, to the merits of the indictment, appellant in answer thereto interposed demurrer upon the following grounds:

¶4 “Comes the defendant and demurs to the Indictment and each count thereof separately and upon the following separate grounds:

¶5 “(1) That the same states no cause of action.

¶6 “(2) That the same does not charge an offense against the laws of the State of Alabama.

¶7 “(3) For that the Statute upon which the Indictment is founded is unconstitutional and void for uncertainty.”

¶8 The trial of the case below, was had on 25th day of February, 1942.

¶9 The court overruled the demurrer, whereupon the defendant plead not guilty.

¶10 The jury returned a verdict of guiltjr as charged in the indictment, and the court,' as the law requires, duly pronounced the defendant guilty, and sentenced him to a stated period of time to hard labor for the county. From the judgment of conviction this appeal was taken.

¶11 The appeal is upon the record proper, there being no bill of exceptions, in the absence of which the special written charges refused to defendant are not to be considered.

¶12 The indictment was proper in form and substance and was sufficient to apprise the accused of the nature of the charge against him, and what was intended.

¶13 The court properly overruled the demurrer to the indictment. The Statute, Code 1940, Tit. 36, § 31, upon which the indictment is formed is not unconstitutional. State v. Hall, 24 Ala.App. 336, 134 So. 898.

¶14 There is no error apparent upon the record, therefore the judgment of conviction from which this appeal was taken will stand affirmed.

¶15 Affirmed.

/30/alaapp/599 · .json · Public domain