Legal Opinion

Eastep v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided October 3, 1933No. 8 Div. 745PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RICE, Judge.

The bill of exceptions in this ease is affected with the identical infirmity existing in the bill of exceptions discussed in Harris v. Alston, 217 Ala. 414, 116 So. 116; but we will not strike it of our own motion, as the Supreme Court, in the opinion in the ease just cited, said our right to do so was “questionable.” Code 1923, § 7318.

Appellant was on, to wit, September 28, 1931, regularly tried and acquitted, upon charges contained in an indictment theretofore on, to wit, April 11, 1931, duly, etc., returned against him. This indictment contained, among others, the following…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Roberts v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1853
  2. Hall v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1901
  3. People v. McDanielsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  4. Gordon v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1882
  5. Dominick v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1867

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Troup v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1946
  2. Baldwin v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1971
  3. Lindley v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1998
  4. Murphy v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1978
  5. Brown v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1941

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