Swint v. State
Alabama Court of Appeals
Appeal from Montgomery City Court. Heard before Hon. Armstead Brown. Lee Swint was convicted of disposing of mortgaged property, and he appeals. No brief reached the [Reporter.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Montgomery City Court. Heard before Hon. Armstead Brown. Lee Swint was convicted of disposing of mortgaged property, and he appeals. No brief reached the [Reporter. This Court will correct the error in the sentence for cost.— Doioling v. City of Troy, 56 South. 118. The state had a right on cross examination to show time of delivery of the mortgage. — Dr aloe v. The State, 110 Ala. 9; Wall v. The State, 56 South. 57. It is not error to show the birth of progeny of mortgaged animals, as they became subject to the lien and part of the mortgage. — Myer Bros. v. Phillips, 85 Ala. 417;…
1Opinion of the CourtPelham, J.
The defendant having been convicted of disposing of mortgaged property, that part of the judgment sentencing the defendant to hard labor in payment of costs at the rate of 40 cents per day is erroneous, and should be at the-rate of 75 cents per diem.—Dowling v. City of Troy, 1 Ala. App. 508, 56 South. 118.
The lower court’s rulings on the evidence are free from error. The defendant had questioned the witness Gray at length and minutely about the mortgage, and the state had a right to ask when it was delivered to him as part of the transaction inquired about by defendant.
Proof of the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Porter & Co. v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1877
- Meyer Bros. v. CookSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
- Dowling v. City of TroyAlabama Court of Appeals · 1911
- Gans v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1878
- Mooney v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1845
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- First State Bank of Lineville v. Deeb (In Re Deeb)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Alabama · 1985
- Stephens v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1954