Hanners v. State
Hanners v. State.
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
BRICKEN, P. J.
The indictment does not show authentication as provided by Code 1907, § 7300, which reads:
“The concurrence of at least twelve grand jurors is necessary to find an indictment; and when so found, it must be indorsed ‘a true bill’ and the indorsement signed by the foreman.”
For the failure of the indictment to bear this necessary indorsement, it is not a valid indictment and will not support a judgment of conviction. This identical question has been decided, as here, in the following cases: Memory McMullen v. State, ante, p. 504, 86 South. 175 ; Whitley v. State, 166 Ala. 42 , 52 South. 203 ; Bilbo v. State, 1 Ala. App. 74 , 55 South. 927 ; Banks v. State, 13 Ala. App. 41 , 69 South. 242 ; Smiley v. State, 11 Ala. App. 67 , 65 South. 916 ; Joyner v. State, 78 Ala. 448 ; Wilson v. State, 128 Ala. 17, 24 , 29 South. 569 ; Coburn v. State, 151 Ala. 100 , 44 South. 58 , 15 Ann. Cas. 249.
No valid indictment having been shown, it is unnecessary to consider other questions presented.
Reversed and remanded.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.