Case ID: ala_194/html/0001-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "ANDERSON, C. J. —", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Lewis v. The State.
    
      Murder.
    
    (Decided June 30, 1915.
    Rehearing denied November 18, 1915.
    69 South. 913.)
    
      Bills of Exceptions; Filing; Time; Judgment. — The time within which a bill of exceptions must be presented to the trial judge for signing, under section 3019, runs from the date when the judgment was rendered and entered, and not from the date of the sentence; hence, a bill of exceptions presented, to the trial judge on January 22, 1915, wa% not presented within the time allowed where judgment was rendered and entered on October 21st, previous, notwithstanding sentence wms not imposed until October 24th.
    Appeal from Sumter Circuit Court.
    Benj. F. Elmore, and W. F. Herbert, for appellant.
    Heard before Hon. Bernard Harwood.
    Tom Lewis was convicted of murder, and be appeals.
    Affirmed.
    W. L. Martin, Attorney General, and W. H. Mitchell, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.
   ANDERSON, C. J. —

Section 3019 of the Code of 1907 provides that: “Bills of exceptions may be presented at any time within ninety clays from the day on which the judgment is entered, and not afterwards.”

The judgment in this case was rendered and entered October 21, 1914, and the bill was not presented to the trial judge until January 22, 1915, more than 90 days after the rendition of the judgment, and the motion of the state to strike same must be sustained. It is true that the sentence was not imposed - until October 24th, but the judgment of conviction, as disclosed by the record, was rendered and entered October 21st, and the time runs from the rendition and entry of the judgment, and not from the date of sentence. — Ramey v. State, 9 Ala. App. 51, 64 South. 168.

As the bill of exceptions must be stricken, and as no reversible error is disclosed by the record proper, the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Mayfield, Somerville, and Thomas, JJ., concur.