Bruner v. State, 2 Div. 374

Decision Date04 October 1956
Docket Number2 Div. 374
CitationBruner v. State, 265 Ala. 357, 91 So.2d 224 (Ala. 1956)
PartiesJim O. BRUNER v. STATE of Alabama.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Mallory & Mallory, Selma, for petitioner.

John Patterson, Atty. Gen., and Robt. G. Kilgore, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., opposed.

SIMPSON, Justice.

This case is submitted to this Court on motion of the Attorney General to strike the petition for writ of certiorari and the brief of petitioner, and on the merits.

Motion to Strike

The motion to strike is grounded on the failure of petitioner to serve the Attorney General with a copy of the brief. We think the motion is well taken.

Rule 11 of Revised Rules of this Court regarding the signing and serving of briefs upon the adverse party provides:

'Each brief shall be signed by the party filing the same or his attorney and shall contain a certificate at the end thereof, signed by the party or his attorney, that a copy thereof has been delivered or mailed to one of the attorneys for the opposing party, if represented by counsel, or to the opposing party if not so represented and his address is known; and the certificate shall show the date of such delivery or mailing and the person to whom delivered or mailed.'

Rule 39 of the Revised Rules regarding application for certiorari to the Court of Appeals provides inter alia for the filing of a petition for such a writ and an accompanying brief.

It is quite apparent that one prerequisite for a consideration by this Court of a petition for such a writ is that the adverse party or his counsel should be served with a copy of the brief of petitioner within the prescribed fifteen day period, in accordance with New Rule 44 of the Revised Rules of this Court. Such was the import of old Rule 44, as construed by this Court, which provided that the brief on certiorari should contain a certificate 'that a copy of said brief has been served on counsel for the other side.' Burch v. State, 249 Ala. 72, 29 So.2d 425, 426. We think a fair construction of Revised Rules 11 and 39 leads to the same result.

True, a copy of the petition for writ of certiorari and a copy of the brief in support thereof were served upon Hon. Blanchard McCloud, Solicitor of the 4th Judicial Circuit of Alabama, but he is not the attorney who represents the State in the Appellate Courts. This duty devolves upon the Attorney General. The pertinent statute provides that the Attorney General.

'* * * must attend, on the part of the state, to all...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
16 cases
  • M.B. v. R.P.
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • 15 Agosto 2008
    ...Golden v. State, 267 Ala. 456, 103 So.2d 62 [(1958)]; Gambrell v. Bridges, 266 Ala. 302, 96 So.2d 182 [(1957)]; Bruner v. State, 265 Ala. 357, 91 So.2d 224 [(1956)]. See, also, Thorpe v. State, , 119 So.2d 222 [(1960)]. Cf. Tipton v. Tipton, 267 Ala. 64, 100 So.2d 14 [(1957)], where it was ......
  • Cunningham v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 19 Mayo 1960
    ...for rehearing. Supreme Court Rules 11, 39, 44; Code 1940, Title 7, Appendix, Cum. Pocket Parts; 261 Ala. XIX et seq.; Bruner v. State, 265 Ala. 357, 91 So.2d 224; Gambrell v. Bridges, 266 Ala. 302, 96 So.2d 182; Golden v. State, 267 Ala. 456, 103 So.2d 62; Adkins v. State, 268 Ala. 548, 109......
  • Thompson v. State ex rel. Borders
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 6 Noviembre 1958
    ...had on the deputy solicitor and not on the attorney general. Cf. Gambrell v. Bridges, 266 Ala. 302, 303, 96 So.2d 182; Bruner v. State, 265 Ala. 357, 358, 91 So.2d 224. Code 1940, Tit. 7, § 801, provides as follows: 'Upon an appeal being taken, the register, or clerk of the circuit court, o......
  • Banks v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 10 Diciembre 1964
    ...thereof on the attorney general and the time allowed for service has expired. The motion to strike is due to be granted. Bruner v. State, 265 Ala. 357, 91 So.2d 224; Gambrell v. Bridges, 266 Ala. 302, 96 So.2d 182; Golden v. State, 267 Ala. 456, 103 So.2d 62; Adkins v. State, 268 Ala. 548, ......
  • Get Started for Free