72 So. 755 | Ala. Ct. App. | 1916
[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] S.N. Sherman was convicted of violating the prohibition law and he appeals. Affirmed.
(Ed. Note — This cause was reviewed by Supreme Court on application for certiorari, and the writ was denied. See Exparte Sherman,
(3) The recent act regulating the manner of taking appeals in criminal cases provides: "That appeals in criminal cases must be taken at the time of sentence or confession of judgment *177 or within six months thereafter in manner following: (a) An entry of record that defendant appeals from the judgment with or without suspension of judgment, as he may elect, to be taken at the time of judgment rendered, or; (b) The filing of a written statement signed by the defendant or his attorney that defendant appeals from the judgment; the statement to be filed within six months." — Acts 1915, p. 712, § 7.
The judgment in this case, which was entered on the 3d day of December, 1915, recites: "Thereupon, the defendant having made known his desire to prosecute an appeal from the judgment and sentence of the court to the Court of Appeals, it is ordered by the court that the execution of the sentence in this case be suspended, pending said appeal. It is further ordered by the court that said defendant be admitted to bail in the sum of seven hundred and fifty dollars pending said appeal." — Acts 1915, p. 712, § 7.
This entry shows that the defendant complied with all the requirements of the statute on the 3d day of December, 1915, necessary to entitle him to a review of the judgment of conviction by this court. — Gaines v. State,
(4) Subsequent to the taking of the appeal, the defendant filed a motion for new trial, and on the 3d day of January, 1916, an order was made denying the motion, and we are asked to review this action of the court.
After the appeal was taken in the manner provided for by the statute the jurisdiction over the case was transferred from the trial court to this court; and the trial court was without authority to entertain the motion for new trial. — McLaughlinv. Beyer,
The judgment and proceedings of the trial court shown by the record proper appear in all things regular and free from error.
Affirmed. *178