The Birmingham age-herald., 1912-02-20
CAREER WR|TESO ON LAW ENFORCEMENT Cites Views Written When
 Attorney General REVERSAL ON ERROR Gives Figures to Show High Per centage of Reversals in Cases
 Appealed to the Su-
 preme Court
REVERSAL ON ERROR

Col. Alex M. Garber, former attor ney general of Alabama, has given out statement setting forth his opinions on law enforcement in Jefferson coun- ty.
 The particular phase discussed by Colonel Garber deals with reversals in criminal cases as one of the features of the present day procedure in need of adjustment. Colonel Garbers state ment Is as follows:
 since 1885 the percentage of rever- sals In criminal cases appealed to the supreme court has ranged from 2S per cent to 46 per cent. In 1s93-94 the number of criminal cases appealed to the supreme court was 230. One hund red and six of these cases were re-
 versed, making the percentage of re- versals 46. In 1909-10 the number of appeals was 2s6. one hundred and twenty-four cases were reversed, mak- ing the percentage of reversals 43. These two periods record the greatest percentage of reversals from 1885 to 1911. It will be observed from the reports of the attorney general that appeals in criminal cases to the su- preme court have increased from IT in 1887 to 2S6 in 1910.
 Tn all the reports of the attorney general in regent years there has been special reference to this subject, most of them containing a recommendation mat reversals should not be Agranted | on purely technical points. During all or this time much has been said in the public prints with regard to re- versals for technical errors in crim- lnal cases. Attention has been called more than once to the fact that a great majority of. these reversals were upon purely technical questions, which did not go to the fairness of the trial or the righteousness of the conviction. Somewhat Relaxed
 Since 1894 the doctrine of error with out injury has been somewhat relaxed by our supreme court under the influence of section 43S3 of the code of 1S96-now sec tion 6264 of the code of 1907-but the statute is yet so strictly construed that 1t does not meet the purpose for which 1t was designed. It is safe to assert that the doctrine of error without injury as applicable under our practice in criminal cases ought to be abolished. Such doc Urine has no rightful place in system of jurisprudence, designed for the punish ment and suppression of crime. l believe tilo lo bt iut StllOuS anu uDDldSeu Juu2- ment of a large majority of the people and of the lawyers of Alabama. Never theless, it has been impossible to enact a law abolishing the doctrine or materlal- ly modifying 1t, although bill seeking to accomplish some improvement or mod ification of it as 1t now exists under our statutes has been introduced at various sessions of the legislature. but alway $ has met with defeat or indefinite post ponement.
 The last clause of section 6264 Of the code is as follows:
 But the judgment of conviction must not be reversed because of error in the record, when the court is satisfied that no injury resulted thererom 10 the 1e- fendant.'
 This should be amended, in my opinion, and I so recommended while attorney gen. eral, so as to read thus:
 "' The judgment of conviction must not
 be reversed because of error in the rec ord, unless the court is satisfied that in- jury resulted therefrom to the defend ant
 This change would require the court to say affirmative that injury resulted
 to the defendant, whereas, under the
 present statute the court must be satis- fled that no injury resulted therefrom to the defendant-a conclusion frequently most difficult to reach.
 q also called attention in my bi-annual
 reports as attorney general to the prac-
 tice of giving special charges to the jury at the instance of the defendant.
 Quotes From Annual Report
 q quote the following from my bi- annual report of 1910;
 "'Where the proposition embodied III the special charge is covered by the gen eral charge the former, if correct, must also be given under the present practice, otherwise the case will be reversed "In the average criminal case such charges have but little influence with the jury and I am convinced that this practice as to special charges should be abolished entirely, or at least modified to this extent.
 "'The judgment should not he re- versed for the refusal of special charge requested by appellant II the proposition embodied in such charge is substantially covered by the oral l charge of the court and that no case | be reversed unless 1t affirmatively ap- pears from the record that the trial court failed or refused to charge the | jury upon the proposition embodied in | the refused charge
 | "I am advised that with but little l change the State Bar association adopt cd this recommendation and embodied l it in a bill introduced in the legisla- l ture of 1911 l am also advised that
 the bill met similar fate as that of | it's predecessors on this subject l In my judgment the above suggested changes in our criminal procedure
 would prove most efficacious. with re- suits most effective and salutary in law enforcement. In this connection let
 me take the following excerpt from my report of 1908, when discussing I the criminal record of Alabama: | "A statute should be passed provid- ing that where defendant, indicted