Case ID: ala_200/html/0023-01.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

(75 South. 335)
    CONSFORD v. STATE.
    (4 Div. 722.)
    (Supreme Court of Alabama.
    April 26, 1917.)
    Appeal and Error <&wkey;>1095 — Review—Findings and Conclusions.
    The Supreme Court will not review or revise the findings of fact by the Court of Appeals, or the application of the law to the facts by such court.
    . [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ '4268, 4329, 4339.]
    Certiorari to Court of Appeals.
    Will C. Consford was convicted of murder, and, the conviction being affirmed by the ■Court of Appeals (15 Ala. App. 627, 74 South.' 740), he brings certiorari.
    Writ denied.
    W. O. Mulkey, of Geneva, and Farmer & Farmer, of Dothah, for appellant.
    W. D. Martin, Atty. Gen., and Harwell G. Davis, Asst. Atty. Gen., for tbe State.
   ANDERSON, C. J.

The only points upon which a review of the Court of Appeals is urged in brief of counsel relate to a finding of facts ¡by tbe said court, or in. tbe application of the law to the facts, and we have repeatedly held that we will not review or revise the conclusions and findings of the Court of Appeals in these respects. Postal Telegraph Cable Co. v. Minderhout, 195 Ala. 420, 71 South. 91, and cases there cited.

The writ is denied.

McClellan, sayre, and Gardner, JJ., concur.