Hicks v. State
Edwin R. Hicks v. State.
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
"Writ denied on the authority of Ex parte Robinson, 183 Ala. 30 , 63 So. 177 .
ANDERSON, C. J., and SOMERVILLE, THOMAS, and BOULDIN, JX, concur.
Addendum
On Rehearing.
PER CURIAM.
Upon the original consideration of this petition this court was of the opinion that the holding of the Court of Appeals was correct, and denied the writ of certiorari upon the authority of the case of Ex parte Robinson, 183 Ala. 30 , 63 So. 177 , which said case is in point against the petitioner’s contention, was well considered and decided by the court in banc.
In the brief upon application for rehearing we are cited to the case of Zaner v. State, 90 Ala. 651 , 8 So. 698 , which does support petitioner’s contention; but, had counsel duly considered the opinion in the Robinson Case, supra, they would have discovered that the Zaner Case had been expressly overruled.
Writ denied.
ANDERSON, C. X, and SOMERVILLE, THOMAS, and BOULDIN, JJ., concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.