Bradford v. State, 92 So. 17

MERRITT, J.

On appeal from the Jefferson county court of misdemeanor, to the circuit court, the defendant was convicted under a complaint ‍‌‌​​​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‍which charged that he failed to dip his cattle after being warned to do so.

[1] There are certain demurrers set out in the record, but the judgment entry does not recite that they were presented to, considered, or acted upon by ‍‌‌​​​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‍the court, and, this being true, this court cannot consider them. Birmingham, E. & B. R. R. Co. v. Hoskins, 14 Ala. App. 254, 69 South. 339; Yarbrough v. State, 15 Ala. App. 460, 73 South. 830.

However, the questions raised by the demurrers have been decided adversely ‍‌‌​​​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‍to the defendant in the case of Williams v. State ante, p. 83, 89 South. 97.

[2] There is no bill of exceptions in the transcript; consequently, the court’s refusal to give certain written charges asked by the defendant will not be reviewed. 13 ‍‌‌​​​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‍Mitehie’s Digest, 795; Moran v. State, 15 Ala. App. 379, 73 So. 748; Yarbrough v. State, 15 Ala. App. 460, 73 So. 830; Ward v. State, 15 Ala. App. 598, 74 So. 727; Graham v. State, 16 Ala. App. 87, 75 So. 635.

We find no error in the ‍‌‌​​​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‍record, and the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed.

<®=3Por other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes

Case Details

Case Name: Bradford v. State

Court Name: Alabama Court of Appeals

Date Published: Jan 17, 1922

Citations: 92 So. 17; 18 Ala. App. 401; 1922 Ala. App. LEXIS 96; 6 Div. 855.

Docket Number: 6 Div. 855.

Court Abbreviation: Ala. Ct. App.