Code of Alabama
Ala. Code § 15-8-25 (2026)
How Facts Constituting Offense to Be Stated.
✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
An indictment must state the facts constituting the offense in ordinary and concise language, without prolixity or repetition, in such a manner as to enable a person of common understanding to know what is intended and with that degree of certainty which will enable the court, on conviction, to pronounce the proper judgment. In no case are the words “force of arms” or “contrary to the form of the statute” necessary.
(Code 1852, §562; Code 1867, §4112; Code 1876, §4785; Code 1886, §4368; Code 1896, §4896; Code 1907, §7134; Code 1923, §4529; Code 1940, T. 15, §232.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26
cases, 1978–2016 · leading case: State v. Roffler, 69 So. 3d 225 (Ala. 2010).
State v. Roffler, 69 So. 3d 225 (Ala. 2010). “"It is fundamental that an indictment `must state the facts constituting the offense in ordinary and concise language,... in such a manner as to enable a person of common understanding to know what is intended and with that degree of certainty which will enable the court, on…”
Evans v. State, 361 So. 2d 666 (Ala. 1978). “1975, § 15-8-25). The Court of Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction to review a decision in which the death penalty is imposed, §§ 12-3-9, XX-XX-XXX, Code of Ala.”
Brown v. State, 11 So. 3d 866 (Ala. Crim. App. 2007). “Aside from his defense of insanity, he raised a defense to establish that, although he was guilty of murder, the murder was not committed during the commission of the other alleged felonies, and therefore he was not guilty of the capital offense.”
Ex Parte Lewis, 811 So. 2d 485 (Ala. 2001). “Section 15-8-25, Ala.Code 1975, states: "An indictment must state the facts constituting the offense in ordinary and concise language, without prolixity or repetition, in such a manner as to enable a person of common understanding to know what is intended and with that degree of…”
Breckenridge v. State, 628 So. 2d 1012 (Ala. Crim. App. 1993). “, provides: "The indictment or information shall be a plain, concise statement of the charge in ordinary language sufficiently definite to inform a defendant of common understanding of the offense charged and with that degree of certainty which will enable the court, upon…”
Phelps v. State, 439 So. 2d 727 (Ala. Crim. App. 1983). “Section 15-8-25, Code of Alabama 1975, is similar to § 275 of the New York Code of Criminal Procedure in that it also requires the indictment to "state the facts constituting the offense in ordinary and concise language, without prolixity or repetition, in such a manner as to…”
Graham v. State, 210 So. 3d 1148 (Ala. Crim. App. 2016). “' Section 15-8-25, Ala.Code 1975, provides: “ ‘An indictment must state the facts constituting the offense in ordinary and concise language, without prolixity or repetition, in such a manner as to enable a person of common understanding to know what is intended and with that…”
Garrison v. State, 521 So. 2d 997 (Ala. Crim. App. 1987). “" See also § 15-8-25, Code of Alabama (1975). The indictment follows the statutory form for the crimes charged.”
Johnson v. State, 584 So. 2d 881 (Ala. Crim. App. 1991). “1980), held that: "Pursuant to Code § 15-8-25, an indictment must state the facts constituting the offense in ordinary and concise language in such a manner as to enable a person of common understanding to know what is intended.”
Montez Spradley v. State of Alabama., 128 So. 3d 774 (Ala. Crim. App. 2011). “” In addressing the requirements for an indictment, § 15-8-25, Ala.Code 1975, provides: “An indictment must state the facts constituting the offense in ordinary and concise language, without prolixity or repetition, in such a manner as to enable a person of common understanding…”
Sandifer v. State, 535 So. 2d 203 (Ala. Crim. App. 1988). “§ 15-8-25, Code of Alabama (1975). II The appellant argues that the trial court erred in failing to suppress his statements because, he says, they were the result of a custodial interrogation pursuant to an invalid arrest.”
Rogers v. State, 539 So. 2d 451 (Ala. Crim. App. 1988). “In Copeland we find the following: *454 "Alabama Code 1975, § 15-8-25, provides how facts constituting the offense must be charged: "`An indictment must state the facts constituting the offense in ordinary and concise language, without prolixity or repetition, in such a manner…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.