Case ID: ala_215/html/0581-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BROWN, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(112 So. 193)
    RICHARDSON v. STATE.
    (1 Div. 447.)
    (Supreme Court of Alabama.
    March 24, 1927.)
    Certiorari <&wkey;4 — Filing petition for certiorari to review Court of Appeals’ judgment, without applying for rehearing, violates Supreme Court rule 44,
    Filing of petition for certiorari to review judgment of Court of Appeals, without making application for rehearing in that court, is not compliance with Supreme Court rule 44 (4 Code 1923, p. 894), and motion to dismiss petition will be granted.
    Certiorari to Court of Appeals.
    Petition of Paul Richardson for certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that court in Richardson v. State, 21 Ala. App. 639, 111 So. 202. '
    See, also, ante, p. 318, 111 So. 204.
    Bybart & Hare, of Monroeville, for petitioner.
    Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., for the State.
   BROWN, J.

After affirmance by the Court of Appeals of the judgment of the circuit court, on the authority of Ex parte State ex rel. v. Richardson (Ala. App.) 111 So. 202, and In re Richardson v. State (Ala. Sup.) 111 So. 204, the appellant, without making application for rehearing in the Court of Appeals, filed the petition for certiorari. This was not a compliance with the rule in such cases, and the motion of the state to dismiss the' petition will be granted. Supreme Court rule 44, Code of 1923, p. 894.

Dismissed.

ANDERSON, C. X, and SOMERVILLE and THOMAS, JJ., concur. 
      
       a Ala. App. 639.
     
      
       “Ante, p. 318.