History
  • No items yet
midpage
Scott v. State
104 So. 925
| Ala. Ct. App. | 1925
|
Check Treatment

There were many objections and exceptions to the introduction of evidence, none of which present any new or novel questions. None of these are here insisted on as error, further than that they appear in the record, which under the statute we are required to pass upon. We have done this, and find that in the several rulings there was no error prejudicial to the defendant's case, which would entitle him to a reversal. The facts were in dispute, and properly submitted to a jury under a fair charge of the court. We are not authorized to disturb the verdict. There being no error in the record, let the judgment be affirmed. Affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Scott v. State
Court Name: Alabama Court of Appeals
Date Published: Apr 21, 1925
Citation: 104 So. 925
Docket Number: 7 Div. 17.
Court Abbreviation: Ala. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.