Case ID: ala_153/html/0066-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "ANDERSON, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Cobb v. The State
    
      Using Profane Language in the Presence of Females.
    
    (Decided Dec. 19, 1907.
    45 South. 223.)
    
      Criminal Law; Affidavit. — Where the affidavit charged defendant with using profane language in the presence of females it was proper to allow it to be amended by inserting the words “abusive, insulting or obscene” between the words, “profane” and “language,” it not being shown that it was not re-verified.
    Appeal from Jefferson Criminal Court.
    Heard before Hon. S. L. Weaver.
    Sam Cobb was convicted of using profane and insulting language in the presence of females, and appeals.
    Affirmed.
    The defendant was charged with using profane langauge in the presence or hearing of females. This was the wording of the affidavit which was taken before a justice of the peace, and on which a warrant was issued returnable to the Jefferson criminal court. The warrant charged abusive, insulting, or obscene language in the presence or hearing of females. Demurrer was interposed to the affidavit, because it fails to charge any offense known to the law, which demurrer was overruled. No amendment is shown by the record; hut the judgment entry recites that on motion of the solicitor leave was granted to amend the affidavit so as to insert after the word “profane,” and before the word “language,” the words “abusive, insulting, or obscene.” The defendant was convicted, and fined $1 costs.
    Andress & Chappell, for appellant.
    No brief came to the Reporter.
    
      Alexander M. Garber, Attorney General, for the State.
   ANDERSON, J.

— The affidavit was made before a justice of the peace, and the warrant was returnable to the criminal court of Jefferson county, which said court had original jurisdiction. The judgment entry shows that the affidavit was amended so as to charge an offense, which amendment was authorized under the law, and for aught that appears the affidavit was reverified.

The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Tyson, O. J., and Dowdell and McClellan, JJ., concur.