Kabase v. State
| Decision Date | 25 March 1943 |
| Docket Number | 6 Div. 125. |
| Citation | 12 So.2d 766,244 Ala. 182 |
| Parties | KABASE v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Wm. N. McQueen, Acting Atty. Gen., and John O. Harris and Bernard F. Sykes, Asst. Attys. Gen., for the petition.
Beddow, Ray & Jones, of Birmingham, opposed.
Following the adoption of Supreme Court Rule 45, Code 1940, Tit. 7 Appendix, substantial error is not presumed, but the burden is upon the appellant to show error, and before a reversal of the judgment is to be had, it must appear to the Court that the error complained of has probably "injuriously affected substantial rights of the parties," to use the language of the rule. Henderson v. Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. R. Co., 190 Ala. 126, 67 So. 414.
The opinion of the Court of Appeals cites approvingly Robinson v. State, 29 Ala.App. 47, 191 So. 649, containing an expression indicating a contrary view, which was corrected by this Court on review by certiorari (Robinson v. State, 238 Ala. 441, 191 So. 655) as appears from the concluding paragraph of the opinion. The Court of Appeals also cites Roan v. State, 225 Ala. 428, 143 So. 454. But what was there said is to be interpreted in the light of the question being considered-the granting of a new trial for "outside" interference with the jury in the matter of their deliberation on the verdict. That authority, therefore, is inaptly cited upon the question presented on this appeal.
We find no further reason for any criticism of the opinion of the Court of Appeals and conclude that the writ of certiorari is due to be denied. It is so ordered.
Writ denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fuller v. State
...accused, it is his duty to show such error. It cannot be presumed. Kabase v. State, 31 Ala.App. 77, 12 So.2d 758, certiorari denied 244 Ala. 182, 12 So.2d 766. See Title 30, Secs. 6 and 55, Code of 1940; see, also, Sec. 6, Constitution of Alabama 1901. Our cases are legion to the effect tha......
-
Blue v. State
... ... to inject the poison of bias and prejudice into the minds of ... the jury. They created an atmosphere of bias and prejudice ... which no remarks by the court ... [19 So.2d 17] ... could eradicate. This is not justice and prejudicial error ... has been shown. Kabase v. State, 244 Ala. 182, 12 ... So.2d 766 ... "Reverting ... to the various arguments and statements which the appellant ... assigns as showing a general course of prejudicial appeal to ... the jury, and as creating a general atmosphere of illegal ... presentation of facts, etc., it ... ...
-
Britain v. State
...and prejudice which no remarks by the court could eradicate. This is not justice and prejudicial error has been shown. Kabase v. State, 244 Ala. 182, 12 So.2d 766 [1943]." "Bezotte v. State, 358 So.2d 521, 527 (Ala.Crim.App.1978)." The closing argument by the prosecution was so prejudicial ......
-
Page v. State
...but must also demonstrate that such error was probably injurious. Kennedy v. State, 291 Ala. 62, 277 So.2d 878 (1973); Kabase v. State, 244 Ala. 182, 12 So.2d 766 (1943). We are authorized to reverse only when the error complained of has probably injuriously affected substantial rights, and......