From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Odom v. State

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Jun 17, 1924
101 So. 531 (Ala. Crim. App. 1924)

Opinion

7 Div. 920.

February 5, 1924. Rehearing Denied June 17, 1924.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Etowah County; O.A. Steele, Judge.

Burrell Odom was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Certiorari denied by Supreme Court in Ex parte Odom, 211 Ala. 616, 101 So. 531.

E.O. McCord Son, of Gadsden, for appellant.

Brief of counsel did not reach the Reporter.

Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., for the State.

Brief of counsel did not reach the Reporter.


The appellant was convicted for violation of the prohibition laws.

The indictment named the defendant as Burrell Odom, and he interposed a plea of misnomer, and averred that his name was Burl Odam. The demurrer to the plea was properly sustained on the ground that the names Burl Odam and Burrell Odom are idem sonans. The following words have been held idem sonans: "Booth and Boothe," Jackson's Case, 74 Ala. 26; "Burdet and Boudet," "Boredet and Bouredet," Aaron's Case, 37 Ala. 106; "Edmundson and Edminson," Edmundson's Case, 17 Ala. 179, 52 Am. Dec. 169.

The defendant interposed a plea of former jeopardy, setting up that he had been heretofore convicted of the same offense in the federal court. Demurrer to the plea was properly sustained. It has many times been held by this court that a prosecution in the federal courts for violation of the National Prohibition Act is not a bar to a prosecution for a violation of the state prohibition laws based upon the same transaction. Gilbert v. State, 19 Ala. App. 104, 95 So. 502; Gamlin v. State, 19 Ala. App. 119, 95 So. 505.

There is no bill of exceptions. The record discloses no error. The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Odom v. State

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Jun 17, 1924
101 So. 531 (Ala. Crim. App. 1924)
Case details for

Odom v. State

Case Details

Full title:ODOM v. STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Alabama

Date published: Jun 17, 1924

Citations

101 So. 531 (Ala. Crim. App. 1924)
101 So. 531

Citing Cases

McCullar v. State

Accordingly we hold that in this case the names "McCulla, McCullough, and McCullar" are idem sonans, and the…

McCoy v. State

But a mere inaccuracy, where the identity of the person named in the indictment with the one named in the…