midpage

Kirkland v. StateKirkland v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals
Apr 13, 1915
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Thomas
THOMAS, J.

The judgment entry is erroneous in that it fails to set out ‍​​​‌‌‌​​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‍either the amount of costs or the number of days required to work out the costs at the rate of 75 cents per day.

This ‍​​​‌‌‌​​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‍being the only error in the record, the judgment of conviction and the sentence are in all things affirmed, except as to the costs. ‍​​​‌‌‌​​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‍To this extent the judgment and sentence are reversed in order that the trial court may enter up proper judgment and sentence as to ‍​​​‌‌‌​​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‍the costs in conformity with the requirements of section 7635 of the Code.—Loudermilk v. State, 4 Ala. App. 167, 58 South. 180; Woods v. State, 10 Ala. App. 96, 64 South. ‍​​​‌‌‌​​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‍508; Evans’ Case, 109 Ala. 11, 19 South. 535.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded

Case Details

Case Name: Kirkland v. State
Court Name: Alabama Court of Appeals
Date Published: Apr 13, 1915
Citations: 668 So. 518; 12 Ala. App. 204; 1915 Ala. App. LEXIS 151
Court Abbreviation: Ala. Ct. App.
Log In