Peters v. State

• Decision Date: 15 July 1941
• Docket Number: 7 Div. 642.
• Citation: 4 So.2d 514,30 Ala.App. 279
• Parties: PETERS v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Court of Appeals

4 So.2d 514

30 Ala.App. 279

PETERS v. STATE.

7 Div. 642.

Alabama Court of Appeals

July 15, 1941

Rehearing Denied Oct. 7, 1941.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Etowah County; W. M. Rayburn Judge.

Certiorari denied by Supreme Court in Peters v. State (7 Div. 679)4 So.2d 516.

Motley & Motley and E. L. Roberts, all of Gadsden, for appellant.

Thos. S. Lawson, Atty. Gen., for the State.

BRICKEN Presiding Judge.

Habeas corpus proceeding, wherein petitioner avers that he is imprisoned in the county jail of Etowa County, Alabama, by one Henry W. Smith, Sheriff, under a writ or other paper issued from the Circuit Court of Marshall County, that said writ was improperly issued and is not legal but was issued by the Circuit Court of Marshall County wrongfully, and without probable cause therefor and said papers are unlawful and illegal and he says that his case was reversed in the Court of Appeals of Alabama and that said case was reversed for proper sentence at a regular term of the Marshall County Circuit Court, that said Court has never sentenced him and that he is imprisoned although he has given a good and sufficient bond for his appearance at said regular term of the Circuit Court of Marshall County and that he is ready and willing to appear at said regular term of the Marshall County Court as required by law.

The petition was presented to, and regularly considered, by the Honorable W. M. Rayburn, as Judge of the 10th Judicial Circuit, of the State of Alabama. Said judge denied the writ and from this order and judgment this appeal was taken.

As appears of record, this petitioner was indicted by the grand jury of Marshall County at the fall term 1939 of the circuit court, for the offense of forgery in the 2nd degree, and was tried upon said indictment on the 3rd day of April 1940. The trial resulted in the conviction of the defendant under the following verdict of the jury, viz: "We the jury find the defendant guilty as charged in the indictment." In this connection the judgment entry recites, "It is therefore considered, ordered and adjudged by the court that the defendant is guilty of forgery as charged in the indictment, etc."

On appeal to this court, from said judgment of conviction, the court ordered and adjudged that no reversible error appeared upon the trial in the court below and therefore duly affirmed said judgment of conviction on March 4, 1941. 200 So. 800. From that date, the defendant (petitioner here) was a...