Kimbell v. State
| Decision Date | 16 December 1909 |
| Citation | 165 Ala. 118,51 So. 16 |
| Parties | KIMBELL v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Elmore County; W. W. Pearson, Judge.
Augie Kimbell appeals from a conviction. Affirmed.
R. H Golson, D. K. Middleton, and R. T. Goodwyn, for appellant.
Alexander M. Gar ber, Atty. Gen., for the State.
The indictment in this case was as follows:
The defendant moved to quash the indictment, which motion being overruled, he then demurred to the indictment, and his demurrers were overruled. The trial resulted in conviction and sentence, from which judgment defendant appeals, here assigning as error the overruling of his motion and demurrers.
There is no bill of exceptions showing the motion or the evidence in support thereof; nor does the record affirmatively show the defects of which complaint is made. Motions to quash on grounds dehors the record, and proceedings thereunder, must be shown by bill of exceptions, in order to be reviewed on appeal. For lack of this in this case, we cannot review the action of the court on the motion to quash. Garrett v. State, 97 Ala. 18, 14 So. 327.
The indictment was good, and not subject to demurrer. While it did not follow the Code form (No. 112) for vagrancy, it was fuller than the form prescribes. It charged that the defendant did, or was guilty of, the acts which the statute defines or denounces as the crime of vagrancy. Then certainly it was sufficient, and the defendant has no...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Carroll v. State, 8 Div. 833
...348 So.2d 1105 (Ala.1977), Alabama Code Section 15-8-30 (1975), or the place or address where the offense was committed, Kimbell v. State, 165 Ala. 118, 51 So. 16 (1909); Harris v. State, 44 Ala.App. 449, 212 So.2d 695, cert. denied, 282 Ala. 726, 212 So.2d 704 (1968); Alabama Code Section ......
-
Fealy v. City of Birmingham
...42 Ala. 543; Yancy's Case, 63 Ala. 141; Trayler's Case, 100 Ala. 142, 14 So. 634; Johnson's Case, 152 Ala. 46, 44 So. 670; Kimbell's Case, 165 Ala. 118, 51 So. 16. It is objected that the complaint was not to. The record does not disclose the affidavit before the recorder of the city of Bir......
-
Cowart v. State
...statute, and was not subject to the several objections made by the demurrers. Johnson v. State, 152 Ala. 46, 44 So. 670; Kimbell v. State, 165 Ala. 118, 51 So. 16; Brown (Jerome S.) v. State, 72 So. The appellant further contends that he was not, under the evidence, a bailee or trustee of t......
-
Danal v. State
...105 Ala. 240, 16 So. 720; Thompson v. Collier, 170 Ala. 469, 54 So. 493; City of Ensley v. Smith, 165 Ala. 387, 51 So. 343; Kimbell v. State, 165 Ala. 118, 51 So. 16; D.C. Finney v. Studebaker Corporation of America, 72 So. 54. The word "carry," as used in section 2 of said statute, prohibi......