Taylor v. State
| Decision Date | 17 December 1946 |
| Docket Number | 6 Div. 300. |
| Citation | Taylor v. State, 32 Ala.App. 570, 28 So.2d 318 (Ala. App. 1946) |
| Parties | TAYLOR v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Davis & Bealle, of Tuscaloosa, for appellant.
Wm. N McQueen, Atty. Gen., for the State.
Appellant was convicted in the court below of manslaughter in the first degree. This appeal is presented on the record proper without a transcription of the testimony.
Defendant in the lower court interposed a motion to quash the venire on which, the record indicates, issue was joined. We do not have before us any record of testimony taken in support of the motion. In the absence of this information, we are unable to determine whether or not the allegations of the motion are true. We do not commit ourselves to a holding that, if proven, the grounds are sufficient to sustain the attack; but we cannot charge error to the trial judge in his...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Janezic v. State
...whether the allegations of the motion are true and cannot charge error to the trial judge in overruling the motion. Taylor v. State, 32 Ala. App. 570, 28 So.2d 318 (1947). "As in Nickerson and Goldin v. State, 271 Ala. 678 127 So.2d 375 (1961), `we are left unconvinced, nor was it made appa......
-
Gwin v. State
...whether the allegations of the motion are true and cannot charge error to the trial judge in overruling the motion. Taylor v. State, 32 Ala.App. 570, 28 So.2d 318 (1947). As in Nickerson and Goldin v. State, 271 Ala. 678, 127 So.2d 375 (1961), "we are left unconvinced, nor was it made appar......
- Brown-Service Ins. Co. v. Wright
-
Ex parte Stroud
... ... The ... shipbuilding industry at Chickasaw during the War attracted a ... large number of workers from various sections of the State, ... intending to remain only for the period when such services ... would be needed. The fact that his family and furniture were ... there is not ... ...