From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Davenport v. Austin

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Jun 21, 1932
142 So. 777 (Ala. Crim. App. 1932)

Opinion

8 Div. 574.

June 7, 1932. Rehearing Denied June 21, 1932.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Lauderdale County; J. Fred Johnson, Jr., Judge.

Bastardy proceeding by the State against Buddy Guy Austin. From a judgment quashing the proceeding, the State, for the use of Linnie Davenport, appeals.

Appeal dismissed.

R. T. Simpson, Jr., Sol., of Florence, and Lanier Pride, of Huntsville, for the State.

In view of the decision, it is not necessary that brief be here set out.

Bradshaw Barnett, of Florence, for appellee.

The appeal was not taken within 30 days after rendition of the judgment, and the appeal must be dismissed. Code 1923, § 3439; Boshell v. Phillips, 207 Ala. 628, 93 So. 576; Blackburn v. Huber Mfg. Co., 135 Ala. 598, 33 So. 160; Lide v. Park, 132 Ala. 222, 31 So. 360; Dennis v. Currie, 142 Ala. 637, 38 So. 802; Rowell v. State, 166 Ala. 44, 52 So. 310; Bickley v. Hays, 183 Ala. 506, 62 So. 767.


A prosecution, for the offense of bastardy, was begun against appellee, under and in pursuance to the provisions of chapter 85 of the Code of 1923 (sections 3416-3439).

When the case reached the circuit court, that court, for reasons deemed by it sufficient, granted appellee's motion to "strike the complaint and bond in the (this) cause and quash the proceedings," etc., by an order made and entered on March 18, 1931.

Thereafter, on April 29, 1931, this appeal was taken by the state, the "security for the costs of the appeal," filed by the prosecutrix in the case, under the provisions of Code 1923, § 3439, reciting that said security was given because prosecutrix desired to appeal "from the ruling of the Circuit Court of Lauderdale County etc. dismissing said cause out of said court on motion of the defendant (appellee)," etc.

As appears, the appeal was taken more than 30 days (the time prescribed by Code, § 3439, supra) from the date of the judgment sought to be reviewed.

We have no discretion but to grant the motion to dismiss the appeal duly filed here by appellee, as, indeed, it would be our duty in the absence of any motion to dismiss the same. Boshell v. Phillips, 207 Ala. 628, 93 So. 576.

And it is so ordered.

Appeal dismissed.


Summaries of

Davenport v. Austin

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Jun 21, 1932
142 So. 777 (Ala. Crim. App. 1932)
Case details for

Davenport v. Austin

Case Details

Full title:STATE, for Use of DAVENPORT, v. AUSTIN

Court:Court of Appeals of Alabama

Date published: Jun 21, 1932

Citations

142 So. 777 (Ala. Crim. App. 1932)
25 Ala. App. 188