#### Gray *v.*The State.

*Carrying Concealed Weapon.*

(Decided May 9, 1911.

55 South. 441.)

1. *Warrant; Return; Process.*— Because a warrant of arrest is made returnable to the judge of the county court instead, of to the court does not render it fatally defective.

2. *Same; Statutes.*— Where accused was arrested on a warrant returnable to the judge of the county court of Olay county, he was properly triable on a complaint filed by the solicitor charging the offense denominated in the warrant, as provided by section 25. acts 1898-9, p. 186.

Appeal from Clay County Court.

Heard before Hon. E. J. Garrison.

Will Gray was convicted of carrying a pistol, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

The affidavit ivas made before J. W. Miller, a justice of the peace, and charged the carrying of a pistol concealed by the person. The warrant thereon was made returnable before the judge of the county court of Clay county on the 1st day of July, 1909, next. On September 28, 1909, the solicitor filed the complaint as follows: “The state of Alabama, by its solicitor, complains of *261Will Gray that within 12 months before the commencement of this prosecution he did carry a pistol concealed upon his person in said county, against the peace and dignity of the state of Alabama.” The defendant objected to going to trial on this information filed by the solicitor: (1) Because there is no provision of law in this court whereby the defendant can be brought into court, and information filed against him, and the defendant tried upon same; (2) there is no provision of law whereby the defendant can be brought into court, and then information being filed against him, and he be compelled to be.tried on same.

Whatley & Cornelius, for appellant.

No brief came to the Reporter.

Robert C. Bricicell, Attorney General, and Thomas H. Seay, Assistant Attorney G’eneral, for the State.

The warrant was not made fatally defective because made returnable to the judge instead of to the court.— *Carnley v. The*State, 162 Ala. 94; *Redd v. The State,*52 So. 885. County courts have jurisdiction to try misdemeanors upon warrants returnable to them by justices of the peace, and this court has the same jurisdiction. — Acts 1898-9; p. 176; *Smith v. The State,*165 Ala. 122. It was proper for the solicitor to file the complaint and try the defendant thereon so long as the complaint was based upon the original *charge.*— Moore *v. The State,*165 Ala. 109.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was convicted of the offense of carrying a pistol concealed about his person. There is no merit in the objections made to the warrant of arrest, because is was made returnable to the “judge” of the county court, in place of being made returnable *262to the *court.*—Carnley *v. State,*162 Ala. 94, 50 South. 362; *Redd v. State,*167 Ala. 96, 52 South. 885.

The other objections, with regard to the return by a justice of the peace to said county court, to the form of the warrant, and to the complaint filed by the solicitor, are without merit. Section 25 of Acts of 1898-99, p. 186, provides: “That all cases of misdemeanors returned by justices of the peace, or appeals from the justices or other courts of said county, to the said county court shall be tried upon the complaint of the solicitor filed in the cause,” etc.

There being no error apparent on the record, the judgment of the court is affirmed.

Note. — The above opinion was prepared by Mr. Justice Simpson of the Supreme Court, before the transfer of the case to this court, and is adopted by this court.