Ex parte State
Supreme Court of Alabama
Application in the name of the State, on the relation of the Attorney-General, for a writ of prohibition to Hon. F. O. Bandolph, judge of the Probate Court of Montgomery, for the purpose of reviewing and quashing certain proceedings had before him on the petition of Joe Long, who was discharged from custody on a hearing on habeas corpus.
Read the full summary
Application in the name of the State, on the relation of the Attorney-General, for a writ of prohibition to Hon. F. O. Bandolph, judge of the Probate Court of Montgomery, for the purpose of reviewing and quashing certain proceedings had before him on the petition of Joe Long, who was discharged from custody on a hearing on habeas corpus. Said Long was convicted of vagrancy before B. H. Screws, a justice of the peace, and fined $20; and the justice’s mittiimis to the jailor directed him to take said Long into custody, “in default of payment of said fine, and costs amounting to $18.25, and…
1ConcurrenceSomerville, J.
I concur in the foregoing opinion of Judge McClellan, as a proper construction of sections 4502 to 4504 of the present Code. The case of Williams v. State, 55 Ala. 166, decided in 1876, is conclusive of the main question raised, the statutes then in force being substantially the same as those embodied in these sections. It is immaterial that the reasons there given for the correctness of the decision are subject to criticism, if the decision itselE be correct. Since that deliverance was promulgated, it has been followed by many others in which the principle settled was tacitly assumed by this…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Williams v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1876