Ex parte Beaird
| Decision Date | 29 March 1928 |
| Docket Number | 7 Div. 722 |
| Parties | Ex parte BEAIRD. v. STATE. BEAIRD |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Original petition of Homer Beaird for mandamus to Hon. O.A. Steele, as Judge of the Circuit Court of Etowah County, to expunge a record entry of defendant's conviction for murder. Writ denied; petition dismissed.
Street Bradford & Street, of Guntersville, for appellant.
Charlie C. McCall, Atty. Gen., for respondent.
This is an original application for mandamus to the circuit court of Etowah county, after application for relief had been made to that court by the petitioner and refused, to compel the expunction of certain alleged spurious entries made by the clerk on the minutes of the court in the case of the petitioner, who had been indicted, tried, and convicted for the offense of murder.
The facts, so far as they are material to the question presented are: The petitioner was put on trial, under the indictment against him, before a jury, on December 6, 1926, and the trial continued from day to day until the 10th day of December, 1926, resulting in a verdict of guilty of murder in the second degree, and fixing the punishment at 23 years in the penitentiary. On the return of the verdict the trial judge made the following entry on the trial docket:
It is admitted by the petitioner that the day of sentence was, on his motion, postponed until the 3d day of January, 1927, and that an oral order to this effect was announced from the bench, but this order was not noted on the trial docket, nor entered on the minutes of the court.
The clerk failed to record on the minutes the judgment on the verdict of the jury during the term, but did enter a general order continuing all cases pending and undetermined, to the next term of the court.
In the motion made by the petitioner in the trial to expunge, a transcript of which is made a part of the petition here, it is averred "that on the 3d day of January, 1927, said court, before pronouncing judgment of conviction and sentence on petitioner, did overrule a motion, then and there submitted, for a new trial, and also a motion in arrest of judgment, and also after the pronouncement of judgment of conviction and sentence, and before petitioner took his appeal to the Supreme Court, the petitioner did, by leave of the court, refile his said motion for a new trial, and the same was again overruled by the court."
The entry expressing the judgment of conviction on the verdict of the jury, and reciting the presence of the defendant in court, was entered upon the minutes by the clerk of the court, or by his authority, "some time subsequent to the 3d day of January, 1927." It is this entry that petitioner seeks to have expunged, on the ground, as we understand his contention, that the entry made by the clerk on the minutes after the adjournment of the court for the term ending December ______, 1926, was without legal authority.
We judicially know that the term of the circuit court in which the verdict in petitioner's case was returned expired, by operation of law, on the last Saturday before Christmas Day 1926, and that January 3, 1927, was the first day of the next regular term of the circuit court. Code of 1923, § 6667. So the question is: What, if any, authority resided in the clerk of the court to record the judgment of the court on the minutes, at the succeeding term, after the judgment of conviction and the sentence of the law were pronounced by the court on January 3, 1927?
The general rule is that, when a court exhausts its jurisdiction in the final disposition of a case, in the absence of a statute otherwise providing, it has no authority after the expiration of the term to alter or modify its judgments, except for the correction of clerical misprision, or to amend nunc pro tunc so as to make the record speak the truth. Ex parte State (In re Newton), 94 Ala. 431, 10 So. 549.
It is also the rule in our jurisdiction that clerks of circuit courts have no authority to make entries on the minutes of the court while the court is in vacation, though such entries are made in accordance with the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Boykin v. State
...464, 48 S.W.2d 1070; Ex parte Hartley, 330 Mo. 338, 49 S.W.2d 119, 120; Williams v. State, 99 Tex.Cr.R. 356, 269 S.W. 434; Beaird v. State, 217 Ala. 355, 116 So. 367; Ex Hardman, 131 N.J.L., 257, 36 A.2d 213; Pace v. Horton, 194 Ga. 822, 22 S.E.2d 805. In Ex parte Hartley, supra, the Suprem......
-
Moss v. Winston
... ... 138, 8 So. 284. The decree was of date ... of July 18, 1928. We judicially know this was in term time ... (section 6667, Code of 1923; Ex parte Beaird, 217 Ala. 355, ... 116 So. 367); it being after the first Monday after the 4th ... of July (State ex rel. Gaston v. Cunningham, 216 ... ...
-
Scaloni v. State, 3 Div. 27
...of action against the defendant. Charles, A Slave v. The State, 4 Porter 107; Code of Alabama, 1975, See. 12-11-4, 12-11-8; Ex Parte Beaird, 217 Ala. 355, 116 So. 367; Jacobs v. State, 23 Ala.App. 149, 122 So. 806; Certiorari Denied, 219 Ala. 511, 122 So. Next the appellant contends that th......
-
Canada v. State, 7 Div. 929
...jurisdiction and authority to complete the proceedings and render a final judgment disposing of the controversy." Ex parte Beaird, 217 Ala. 355, 357, 116 So. 367, 368 (1928). Although older Alabama cases state that a court retains its jurisdiction over sentencing on an incompleted case so l......