Court Opinion

ID: 9675913
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 05:09:24.369632+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:41.055968
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing
PER CURIAM.
The Attorney General cites to us Oden v. State, 41 Ala.App. 212, 127 So.2d 380, wherein it is stated:
“Our cases perhaps encourage written verdicts for the sake of accuracy and to avoid delays incident to corrections. Allen v. State, 52 Ala. 391; Edwards v. State, 205 Ala. 160, 87 So. 179. But a court which receives an oral verdict is not in error if the verdict is otherwise proper. State v. Underwood, 2 Ala. 744; Pate v. State, 19 Ala.App. 548, 98 So. 819.”
The Attorney General submits that as the oral verdict rendered by the jury was a proper verdict, it alone would be sufficient to sustain the conviction and that the written verdict of buying, receiving and concealing stolen property was merely surplus-age.
It is of course the law, as cited by the Attorney General, that a verdict may be rendered ore tenus, Oden, supra; State v. Underwood, 2 Ala. 744. However to accept the Attorney General’s reasoning would be, essence, giving oral verdicts precedence over written verdicts.
This court frowns upon unwritten verdicts. There is no reason in this day of literacy for a verdict not to be in writing, and although the proposition may not appear as well founded in the light of the instant case, written verdicts are to be encouraged for the sake of accuracy and to avoid delays incident to corrections. Oden, supra.
To give a verdict ore tenus precedence over a written one would be, in our opinion, diametrically opposed to the preference of written verdicts over unwritten verdicts. For this reason, we therefore, must reject the Attorney General’s reasoning.
Although a verdict may be written or oral, where there is both a written and oral verdict, it is necessary that each be in accord with the other. If any inconsistence or ambiguity exists in the verdict, it must be corrected prior to the dismissal of the jury and failure to do so, as in the instant case, will result in a reversal of the case upon trial.
Opinion extended. Application overruled.