Alabama Court of Appeals, 1920

Hanners v. State

Hanners v. State
Alabama Court of Appeals · Decided June 29, 1920 · Bricken
88 So. 55; 17 Ala. App. 597; 1920 Ala. App. LEXIS 220 (Southern Reporter)

Hanners v. State

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.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.