Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

MOTLEY v. STATE

Court of Appeals of Alabama.
Dec 16, 1924
Judgment
Subsequent
References
CaseIQ
Case Information
CITATION CODES
citation codes
DOCKET NO.

6 Div. 494.

Attorney(S)

William H. Brantley, Jr., of Birmingham, for

Counsel argues for error in the refusal of charges requested by defendant, but in view of the decision it is not necessary to set out the brief

Harwell G. Davis,

, Jim Davis,

,

Willard Drake,

, both of Birmingham, for the

Where there is no bill of exceptions, there can be no review of the refusal of charges requested by

Mack v. State, 201

269, 77 So. 683.

JUDGES

FOSTER, J.

ACTS

No Acts

See more information ... Less ...

FOSTER, J.

The appeal is upon the record, without bill of exceptions. In the absence of a bill of exceptions, the requested written charges refused to the defendant cannot be reviewed. Mack v. State, 201 Ala. 269, 77 So. 683; Paitry v. State, 196 Ala. 598, 72 So. 36; Richey v. State, 16 Ala. App. 187, 76 So. 471; Franklin v. State, 16 Ala. App. 192, 76 So. 476. We find no error in the record. The judgment of conviction is affirmed. Affirmed.

© 2026 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

x

Alert

Please log in or sign up for a free trial to access this feature.
Sign Up Login
x