Peters v. State
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the District Court of Lauderdale. Tried before tbe Hon. William P. Chitwood. The 5th, 6th and 9th grounds of the defendant’s motion to quash the venire are as follows : 5th.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of Lauderdale. Tried before tbe Hon. William P. Chitwood. The 5th, 6th and 9th grounds of the defendant’s motion to quash the venire are as follows : 5th. After said box was prepared, as aforesaid, said Commissioners proceeded to draw therefrom a sufficient number of names to constitute both the grand and petit juries, and after the names were so drawn the said Commissioners then selected those to serve as grand jurors and left the remainder to serve as petit jurors. 6th. Said Commissioners during said drawing drew from said box certain names which were…
1Opinion of the CourtColeman, J.
The defendant was indicted for the larceny of “two bales of cotton,” the personal property of Robert Walker, of the value of eighty dollars. The property was described with sufficient definiteness, and the demurrer on this account was properly overruled. The form for larceny given in the Code of 1852 used the phrase “a bag of cotton.” The present Code in the form given for removing or concealing personal property uses the phrase “ one bale of cotton.”
The defendant moved to quash the venire upon-several grounds. It is contended that the motion came too late. The bill of exceptions states that…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Powell v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1889
- Wells v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1891
- Efurd v. Loeb & BrotherSupreme Court of Alabama · 1886
- Steele v. SavageSupreme Court of Alabama · 1887
3Cited by5 opinions
- Ware v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1914
- Blackburn v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1979
- Ward v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1923
- People v. NussbaumNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1914
- Yarbrough v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1917