Reeves v. State

• Citation: 116 Ala. 481,23 So. 28
• Parties: REEVES v. STATE.
• Decision Date: 26 January 1898
• Court: Supreme Court of Alabama

23 So. 28

116 Ala. 481

REEVES v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

January 26, 1898

Appeal from criminal court, Pike county; E. B. Wilkerson, Judge.

Mary Reeves was convicted of living in adultery with one Henry Myhan, and appeals. Affirmed.

The prosecution in this case was commenced by a complaint being made before a justice of the peace of Pike county charging the appellant, Mary Reeves, with living in adultery with one Henry Myhan. The complaint was signed by "Hattie Patterson." In the body of the complaint, and in the warrant which was issued thereon by the sheriff, the person making the complaint is described as "Hattie Patison." Upon the making of the complaint the justice of the peace issued the warrant setting forth therein the offense charged, as contained in the complaint, and made the warrant returnable to the criminal court of Pike county. There was a plea to the jurisdiction of the court, and a motion in arrest of judgment, upon the ground that the warrant was not made returnable to the proper tribunal. This motion was overruled. The defendant interposed a plea in abatement to the motion to quash the complaint, upon the ground that there was a variance between the person alleged in the complaint and in the warrant of arrest to have made the complaint and the person who signed the complaint. This plea and motion were overruled. These rulings constitute the only questions presented for review on the present appeal.

D. A Baker and T. L. Borom, for appellant.

Wm. C Fitts, Atty. Gen., for the State.

McCLELLAN J.

The warrant of arrest issued by a justice of the peace was properly made returnable to the criminal court of Pike county. Walker v. State, 89 Ala. 74, 8 So. 144. The names "Patison" and "Patterson" are, it would seem, idem sonans (16 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law, 122, note p. 124; Taylor v. Rogers, Min. [Ala.] 197; Jackson v. Cody, 9 Cow. 140; Petrie v Woodworth, 3 Caines, 219; Page v. State, 61 Ala. 16; Aaron v. State, 37 Ala. 106; Edmundson v. State, 17 Ala. 179; Gresham v. Walker, 10 Ala. 370); but, whether so or not, it is manifest from the complaint in this case that the Hattie Patterson who verified and subscribed it was identical with the Hattie Patison who appeared before the officer and made it, and that the difference in the spelling of the name resulted from a mere clerical mistake of the person who wrote it. There is no error in the record, and the judgment must be...