Kyzer v. State
Decision Date | 13 May 1941 |
Docket Number | 6 Div. 553. |
Parties | KYZER v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
F F. Windham, of Tuscaloosa, for appellant.
Thos S. Lawson, Atty. Gen., and Willard McCall and John J. Haynes Asst. Attys. Gen., for the State.
It appears from the record in this case that appellant was tried and convicted upon an indictment which charged that he "unlawfully and with malice aforethought did assault J G. Swindle with the intent to murder him," etc. As stated, the jury returned the verdict, viz: "We the jury find the defendant guilty of assault with intent to murder as charged in the indictment."
Upon said verdict, the trial court adjudged the defendant guilty as the law requires, and duly sentenced him to an indeterminate term of imprisonment in the penitentiary for a period of not less than seven years, nor more than ten years. Judgment of conviction was duly pronounced and entered, from which this appeal was taken.
At time of the submission of this case in this court, the State filed the following motion to strike the bill of exceptions, viz:
The foregoing motion to strike the bill of exceptions was made and presented under the provisions of Section 6434, Code 1923, Code 1940, Tit. 7, § 827.
Upon examination of the record, we find the grounds upon which said motion is based are fully sustained, hence the motion is well taken. No exception to the action or ruling of the trial court in overruling and denying the defendant's motion for a new trial is shown by or contained in the bill of exceptions.
The insistence of earnest counsel for appellant that an exception was duly reserved to the action of the court in overruling and denying the motion for a new trial is noted by separate document found in the record, in which it is said: '
We have adverted to and examined page 10 of the transcript and, as stated by appellant's counsel, the above quoted judgment does in fact appear on said page 10, as insisted. But, it also appears that page 10 of this transcript, and everything that appears thereon, is a part of the record proper, and no portion of the bill of exceptions is incorporated thereon. The ruling and exception referred to, supra, nowhere appear in any part of the bill of exceptions, and this is essential to review, as has been held innumerable times by the appellate courts of this State.
The following authorities, and excerpts...
To continue reading
Request your trial