Askew v. State

Decided December 17, 1912

Alabama Court of Appeals · decided 1912-12-17

Heard before Hon. Samuel B. Browne. Clem Askew was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and he appeals. The motion to quash the indictment is not set out in the record, and therefore, cannot be reviewed. — McQueen v. The State, 188 Ala. 63; Gaines v. The State, 149 Ala. 29; Lacy v. The State, 154 Ala. 65.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently June 1915

2 state decisions

Relies on Lacey v. State · McQueen v. State · 4 Ala. App. 205 - Thornton v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1912-12-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

WALKER, P. J.

¶1The ruling on the defendant’s motion to quash the indictment cannot be reviewed, as the record does not set out the motion or otherwise disclose the grounds of it. — McQueen v. State, 138 Ala. 63, 65 South. 39; Lacey v. State, 154 Ala. 65, 45 South. 680.

¶2The court was not in error in overruling the motion in arrest of judgment. That motion undertook to present objections to the indictment on grounds going to the formation of the grand jury which found it. This is permitted to be done only by plea in abatement. — Section 23, Jury Law (Acts Special Session 1909, p. 315) ; Thornton v. State, 4 Ala. App. 205, 59 South. 234.

¶3Affirmed.