Ala. Code
Code of Alabama

Ala. Code § 17-12-4 (2026)

Procedures Upon Malfunction of Equipment.

✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaAla. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

If a precinct ballot counter malfunctions, the polls shall remain open and voters shall deposit their ballots in a ballot box or other suitable container. The inspector shall notify the custodian, who shall maintain a public list of all voting places in which equipment failure has occurred. After the polls close, the ballot box shall be opened and the ballots counted either by hand, as described in Sections 17-12-2 and 17-12-6, or by feeding the ballots into an operable hand precinct ballot counter. Poll watchers of opposing interests and members of the media, if any are present, shall be permitted to witness this process. Where precinct counting equipment is programmed to return ballots containing over-votes, any such ballot returned during a post-election count must be counted by hand following the rules for ballots. The results of this hand count shall be added to the certificate of results, and the ballots shall be bound separately and returned with the other ballots.

(Act 2006-570, p. 1331, §55.)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1993–2014 · leading case: Williams v. Lide, 628 So. 2d 531 (Ala. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Williams v. Lide, 628 So. 2d 531 (Ala. 1993). · cites it 2× “Code 1975, § 17-12-3,] and he identifies himself in the manner set out in [§ 17-12-4]." Hawkins v. Persons, 484 So.2d 1072, 1073 (Ala.”
Ellis v. Coffee Cnty. Bd. of Registrars, 981 F.2d 1185 (11th Cir. 1993). “” Ala. Code § 17-12-4 (1975). Alabama law requires that, before executing the affidavit, a polling inspector shall administer an oath to the person attempting to cast a challenge ballot informing him that, if he takes the oath willfully and falsely, then he is guilty of perjury…”
Davis v. Bennett, 154 So. 3d 114 (Ala. 2014). “” Former § 17-12-4, Ala.Code 1975 (repealed by Act No.”
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.