Case ID: ala-app_3/html/0168-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "WALKER, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Grantham v. The State.
    
      Violating Prohibition Law;
    
    (Decided Feb. 6, 1912.
    57 South. 1025.)
    
      Appeal and Error; Record; Organization of Court; Dismissal.— Where the record fails to show that the judgment appealed from was rendered by a court held at a place designated by law, and presided over by the judge authorized to hold the court, the appeal will be dismissed.
    Appeal from Coffee County Court.
    Heard before Hon. J. N. Ham.
    Tom Grantham ivas convicted of violating the prohibition la.AV, and he appeals.
    Appeal dismissed.
    The only tiling shoivn as to the organization of the court is as folloivs. State of Alabama, Coffee County, 1st Week, July Third, 1911. The sheriff turned into the court, the venire of the jurors regularly drawn for the first week of court, to Añt: (then follows names of jurors, and those ayIio were excused, and those who did not appear). In like manner the following were sworn and empannelled as jury No. 1 and jury No. 2, (here folloAArs their, names). Then follows an account of the completion of the jury on account of the absences and excuses. The bill of exceptions recites that on the 6th day of July, 1911, there was a trial of said cause in the county court of Coffee upon an affidavit and Avarrant, etc.
    
      J. A. Carnley, for appellant.
    The offense was a misdemeanor, and hence was barred by the statute of limitations of twelve months.—Espy v. The State, 447 Ala. 533; Giles v. The State, 88 Ala. 230; Green v. The State, 139 Ala. 157. Sec. 7347, Code 1907. Counsel discuss other errors insisted on, but without further citation of authority.
    R. C. Brickell, Attorney General, and W. L. Martin, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.
    The-organization is not shown, and hence, this court has no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal. — L. & N. v. Lisle, 154 Ala. 556. The appeal should be dismissed. — Thomas v. Daniel Bros., 42 South.' 623; 2 Cyc. 1033.
   WALKER, P. J.

The record in this case does not' show that the court was held at the place designated by law, or that it was convened or presided over by a judge authorized to hold it. The appeal must be dismissed, because of the failure of the record to show that the judgment appealed from was rendered by a court organized pursuant to law.—Thomas v. Daniel Bros., 42 South. 623; McPherson v. Wiggins, 40 South. 961; 2 Cyc. 1033.

Appeal dismissed.