Legal Opinion

Smith v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided April 2, 1929No. 3 Div. 634PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRice, J.

Appellant was regularly indicted and tried for the offense denounced by Code 1923, § 5411. The jury trying the case returned a verdict as follows: “We the jury find the defendant guilty as charged in. the indictment.” Whereupon, and over appellant’s protest, the trial judge proceeded to “fix- the punishment” and to sentence the appellant. This was in contravention of the" plain terms of the statute (Code 1923, § 5411, supra), which are that one convicted, as appellant, .be punished (within certain limits) “at the discretion of the jury.’’ (Italics ours.) And for this unauthorized and…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Ex Parte TannerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Jones v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1964
  2. Ex Parte JenkinsAlabama Court of Appeals · 1955
  3. Prothro v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1979
  4. Headrick v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1970
  5. Houston v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1953

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API