Edwards v. State

Decision Date28 February 1963
Docket Number7 Div. 594
CitationEdwards v. State, 150 So.2d 710, 274 Ala. 569 (Ala. 1963)
PartiesCharles EDWARDS v. STATE of Alabama.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Charles Edwards, pro se.

MacDonald Gallion, Atty. Gen., and Ed Brogden, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

MERRILL, Justice.

This appeal is from a judgment denying an application for a writ of error coram nobis after a hearing.

The defendant was tried and convicted of the offense of first degree murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment in the penitentiary on April 27, 1957.No motion for a new trial was made and no appeal was taken to this court.The defendant was represented by four able attorneys on his trial.

The application for writ of error coram nobis was filed July 11, 1962, and after a motion to dismiss the application was overruled, the cause was set for hearing on October 10, and two qualified attorneys were appointed as counsel to represent defendant, one of whom had represented him at his trial.The court also ordered that defendant be brought to Columbiana on September 27, in order that he might prepare his case.

A part of the court's order denying the application reads:

'On this hearing only testimony was submitted to the court by witnesses who testified at the main trial of this case.No facts were brought to the knowledge of the Court, which were not previously known, nor in the trial of this case which would have prevented the rendition of the judgment as rendered in the case--no facts were presented such as would have prevented a conviction on the trial of the case.

'It is, therefore, the judgment of the Court that the application for writ of error coram nobis is not well taken.'

There is nothing in the record before us which even slightly indicates that the judgment of the lower court was not correct.

...

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

Get Started for Free

Start Your 3-day 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 3-day 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 3-day 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 3-day 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 3-day 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 3-day 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
14 cases
  • Summers v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 21 November 1978
    ...been unknown to the Court and to the defendant at the time of trial. Smith v. Hixon, 149 F.Supp. 283 (S.D.Ala.1957); Edwards v. State, 274 Ala. 569, 150 So.2d 710 (1963); Groce v. State, 48 Ala.App. 709, 267 So.2d 499 (1972). The error must be one which, if presented to the trial court, wou......
  • Morrison v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 27 March 1992
    ...84, 11 L.Ed.2d 43 (1963). "Substantial error is not presumed, but the burden is upon the appellant to show error." Edwards v. State, 274 Ala. 569, 570, 150 So.2d 710, 711, cert. denied, 375 U.S. 882, 84 S.Ct. 152, 11 L.Ed.2d 112 (1963). "It is well established that this Court will not presu......
  • Reeves v. State, 7 Div. 826
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 12 April 1988
    ...appear." Id. "Substantial error is not presumed, but the burden is upon the appellant to show error." Edwards v. State, 274 Ala. 569, 570, 150 So.2d 710, 711 (1963). "A reviewing court cannot predicate error on matters not shown by the record. Indeed, a silent record supports a judgment. It......
  • Hodges v. State, 8 Div. 8
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 16 June 1989
    ...appear.' Id. 'Substantial error is not presumed, but the burden is upon the appellant to show error.' Edwards v. State, 274 Ala. 569, 570, 150 So.2d 710, 711 (1963). 'A reviewing court cannot predicate error on matters not shown by the record. Indeed, a silent record supports a judgment. It......
  • Get Started for Free

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT