Dillard v. State
| Decision Date | 18 June 1903 |
| Citation | 137 Ala. 106,34 So. 851 |
| Parties | DILLARD v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Coffee County Court; John M. Laflin, Judge.
Jim Dillard was convicted of using obscene or insulting language in the presence of females, and appeals. Affirmed.
The appellant in this case was prosecuted and convicted of the offense of using obscene or insulting language in the presence of females. The prosecution was commenced by a complaint, and a warrant issued thereon. In the complaint or affidavit the defendant was designated as J. M. Dillard. The defendant filed a plea of misnomer, in which he set up that he was "known in his community as Jim Dillard, and not as J. M. Dillard." Upon the hearing of the evidence of this plea, the plea was sustained, and thereupon the prosecutor made before the clerk of the circuit court, who was ex officio clerk of the county court, another affidavit which was in words and figures as follows: "Before me R A. King, clerk of the circuit court of Coffee county, in and for said state and county, personally appeared J. T. Williams who being duly sworn deposes and says on oath that he has probable cause for believing and does believe that the offense of Jim Dillard did go sufficiently near to the dwelling house of J. T. Williams and in the presence or within the hearing of the family of the occupants thereof made use of abusive, insulting, or obscene language, has been committed by Jim Dillard, against the peace and dignity of the state of Alabama." The other facts of the case necessary to an understanding of the decision on the present appeal are sufficiently stated in the opinion.
J. F Sanders, for appellant.
Massey Wilson, Atty. Gen., for the State.
It appears by the record that the defendant was proceeded against upon an affidavit made before one Jernigan, a justice of the peace, charging him with the offense of using obscene or insulting language in the presence of females (section 4306, Cr. Code 1896), upon which a warrant was issued returnable to the county court. In answer to this prosecution, he appeared and interposed a plea of misnomer, which, upon a hearing of the evidence, was sustained by the court. Thereupon another affidavit was made before the clerk of the circuit court, charging him, by his correct name, with the same offense, to which he interposed his plea of not guilty. This affidavit is designated by the judgment entry as an amendment...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Seay v. State
... ... the word Saye instead of Seay in the motion. However that may ... be, we are controlled by the record. Had the question been ... properly raised, opportunity could have been given for a ... reverification of the affidavit before further proceedings in ... the county court. Dillard v. State, 137 Ala. 106, 34 ... So. 851; Rogers v. State, 12 Ala.App. 196, 67 So ... 781; Campbell v. State, 150 Ala. 70, 43 So. 743 ... There ... is set out in the record the appeal bond from the county ... court to the circuit court reciting the conviction in the ... county court ... ...
- Jackson Lumber Co. v. McCreary
-
Lemley v. State
... ... jurisdiction, and cannot be waived. Kyser v ... State, 22 Ala. App. 431, 117 So. 157 ... "4 ... Where amendment is allowable to meet plea of misnomer, the ... amendment must be verified in order to charge the defendant ... with the offense. Dillard v. State, 137 Ala. 106, ... 34 So. 851." ... Section ... 4646 of the Code 1923 specifically limits amendments of ... affidavits charging violation of the prohibition laws to ... amendments made to meet "informalities, irregularities ... and technicalities." The failure to charge a ... ...
-
State v. Chapman
...of the defendant. The statute of limitations having perfected a bar, the defendant is discharged.' 'In the case of Dillard v. State, 137 Ala. 106, 34 So. 851, 852, the Supreme Court held that an amendment of an affidavit to meet a plea of misnomer upon which the defendant had judgment in hi......