Crosswhite v. State

Crosswhite v. State.

Crosswhite v. State, 13 So. 2d 693 (Ala. Ct. App. 1943)

Court: Alabama Court of Appeals · State Appellate Courts
Decided: May 11, 1943
Docket: No. 8 Div. 291.
Judges: Bricken
Citations: 13 So. 2d 69331 Ala. App. 1811943 Ala. App. LEXIS 269

Opinion of the Court — Bricken

BRICKEN, Presiding Judge.

The appeal .in this case is from a judgment of conviction for the offense of assault with a weapon. The prosecution was based upon an indictment charging the defendant with said offense.

Before pleading to the merits of the indictment defendant interposed several pleas (former jeopardy), all of the same import, to be set out in the report of this case. These pleas, if and when proven, were a full, complete and conclusive answer to the charge contained in the indictment, for it is the law in this State that any act or omission declared criminal and punishable in different ways by different provisions of law, shall be punished only under one of such provisions, and a conviction or acquittal under any one shall bar a prosecution for the same act or omission under any other provision. Title 15, § 287, Code 1940.

The strict mandate of the fundamental law is, that no person shall, for the same offense, be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb. Const.1901, § 9. This law does not permit a single crime to be subdivided into two or more offenses, nor can a series of charges be based upon the same act.

By the demurrer, the State admits the allegations of the pleas above mentioned. Hurst v. State, 24 Ala.App. 47 , 129 So. 714 . And, as already stated, the pleas were a full and complete answer to the indictment, and this, rinder the law, supra, entitled the defendant to his discharge.

For the error of the court in sustaining the demurrer to the pleas of former jeopardy, the judgment of conviction from which this appeal was taken must be reversed, and the cause remanded.

The insistence of a variance between allegations and proof, as presented, is without merit.

Reversed and remanded.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 14 cases

View all citing references →

State Appellate Courts14

Relies on it most ⓘ

Free v. State455 So. 2d 137 (Ala. Crim. App. 1984)
Smith v. State472 So. 2d 677 (Ala. Crim. App. 1984)
Vogel v. State426 So. 2d 863 (Ala. Crim. App. 1980)
Wildman v. State165 So. 2d 396 (Ala. Ct. App. 1963)
Robinson v. State428 So. 2d 167 (Ala. Crim. App. 1982)
Baldwin v. State251 So. 2d 633 (Ala. Crim. App. 1971)

Most recent

Phillips v. State65 So. 3d 971 (Ala. Crim. App. 2010)
Smith v. State472 So. 2d 677 (Ala. Crim. App. 1984)
Free v. State455 So. 2d 137 (Ala. Crim. App. 1984)
Robinson v. State428 So. 2d 167 (Ala. Crim. App. 1982)
Vogel v. State426 So. 2d 863 (Ala. Crim. App. 1980)
Beckley v. State357 So. 2d 1022 (Ala. Crim. App. 1978)

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.

Authorities cited 1

Depth	Case	Cited by
	Hurst v. State, 129 So. 714 (Ala. Ct. App. 1930)	10

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list