Curry v. State
Alabama Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtSameord, J.
Section 9509 of the Code of 1923 is a statutory direction to the trial court respecting the matter and things therein named, and must be substantially complied with. But it is the duty of an appellant to show by bill of exceptions or otherwise that the court had knowingly violated the section above cited. As in the instant ease., there is no exception showing the omission of the court to say, after reading the written charges given at the request of defendant: “These are instructions given you by the court at the request of the defendant, and are correct statements of the law to be taken by…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Lewis v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1860
- Jones v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1891
- Roberts v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
- Robinson v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1908
- Taylor v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1924
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Aaron v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1960
- Hogue v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1975
- Allford v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1943
- Cook v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1977
- Powell v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1973
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.