From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gandy v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama
Oct 17, 1940
198 So. 267 (Ala. 1940)

Opinion

6 Div. 739.

October 17, 1940.

William Conway, of Birmingham, for petitioner.

It is the duty of the Supreme Court to exercise complete supervision over the Court of Appeals in accordance with the provisions of Section 140 of the Constitution. Ex parte Steverson, 177 Ala. 384, 58 So. 992. Judgment rendered by the Court of Appeals is reviewable by certiorari, the scope and limit of such review is to search for error apparent on the face of the record. Ex parte Atlantic C. L. R. Co., 190 Ala. 132, 67 So. 256; 4 Ala.Dig., Certiorari, 68.

Thos. S. Lawson, Atty. Gen., and John J. Haynes, Asst. Atty. Gen., opposed.


We have just ruled that § 3258 of the Code 1923 does not apply to review of the Court of Appeals on certiorari, and under the settled practice this court only reviews questions of law presented by the opinion of the Court of Appeals. Henry Walden v. State, 198 So. 261.

The opinion of the Court of Appeals states that the defendant's specially requested charges that were refused are "fairly and substantially covered by the court's oral charge, and by the numerous charges given at request of defendant."

The writ of certiorari is due to be denied, and the judgment of the Court of Appeals affirmed. It is so ordered.

Certiorari denied.

Judgment affirmed.

GARDNER, C. J., and THOMAS and KNIGHT, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Gandy v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama
Oct 17, 1940
198 So. 267 (Ala. 1940)
Case details for

Gandy v. State

Case Details

Full title:GANDY v. STATE

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Oct 17, 1940

Citations

198 So. 267 (Ala. 1940)
240 Ala. 202

Citing Cases

Wesson v. State

There is a distinction between aiding and abetting and a conspiracy. Smith v. State, 8 Ala. App. 187, 62 So.…

Royal Ins. Co. v. Robertson

Montgomery Tr. Co. v. Haygood, 152 Ala. 142, 44 So. 560; 2 Alabama Digest, Appeal and Error, 1002; Alabama M.…