State v. Hackney

BRITT, Judge.

Defendant, through his court appointed counsel, contends that the court erred in sentencing the defendant to prison (1) “since it is clear from the evidence that the defendant was truly an alcoholic and thus a man of sickness ... ”, and (2) said sentence “violated the federal constitution in imposing a Cruel and unusual punishment.” We find no merit in either of the contentions and the assignments of error to which they relate are overruled.

However, an examination of the-bill of indictment impels us to conclude that it is fatally defective on the forgery count. The forgery count…