Legal Opinion

Smith v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided February 20, 1951No. 8 Div. 893PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HARWOOD, Judge.

The indictment against this appellant charged him with forging the endorsement on a warrant drawn on the Treasurer of *581the United States. The instrument and the endorsement are fully set forth in the indictment.

The forgery as charged clearly constituted forgery in the first degree, and nothing else. Section 199, Title 14, Code of Alabama 1940.

There appears on the indictment an endorsement “Indictment for 2nd Degree Forgery.” Otherwise the indictment is in every respect regular.

Such endorsement constituted no part of the indictment, and in no way added to or weakened the legal…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Pickens v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1941
  2. Parham v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1949
  3. Neely v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1950
  4. Neely v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1950
  5. Parham v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1949

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Johnson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1979
  2. Griffin v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1983
  3. Kamp v. MorangSupreme Court of Alabama · 1964
  4. Martin v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1977
  5. Martin v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1977

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API