Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

Linder WHISENANT v. STATE.

ANDERSON, C. J.

The only question presented to this court by the petition and brief relates to the ruling of the trial court on the admissibility of certain evidence. We find no decision or treatment by the Court of Appeals, in its opinion, of this question, and cannot therefore review said court under the present proceeding upon a question of law. If, as counsel suggest, the question was argued and insisted upon in said court, it should have been so treated as to enable the defendant to present the question to this court. But, as such was not done, the mere general statement by the Court of Appeals, "We see nowhere prejudicial error," not sufficient to call upon this court to pass on a legal question not discussed or treated by the Court of Appeals.

Writ denied.

GARDNER, BOULDIN, and FOSTER, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

WHISENANT v. STATE
(Nov 19, 1931)