Ex Parte Rice, 89 So. 894 (Ala. Ct. App. 1921). · Go Syfert
Search
Ex Parte Rice, 89 So. 894 (Ala. Ct. App. 1921). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
21 citation events across 6 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Matthews v. State (mdctspecapp, 1986-07-10)
Treatment trajectory · 1924 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1924 1975 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Matthews v. State (2×)
Md. Ct. Spec. App. · 1986 · signal: see · confidence high
See Bryan v. State, 18 Ala. App. 199 , 89 So. 894 , 896 (1921); McIntosh v. State, 91 Tex.Cr.R. 392 , 239 S.W. 622, 623 (1922) (overruling Ellis v. State, 117 S.W. 978 (Tex. 1909), which held that conviction for prostitution was not admissible for impeachment); Chase v. State, 97 Tex.Cr.R. 349 , 261 S.W. 574 (1924); Reid v. State, 100 Tex.Cr.R. 512 , 271 S.W. 625 (1925); Reynolds v. State, 101 Tex.Cr.R. 192 , 274 S.W. 974 (1925); Holgin v. State, 480 S.W.2d 405, 409 (Tex.Cr.App. 1972); Johnson v. State, 453 S.W.2d 828, 830 (Tex.Cr.App. 1970).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ex Parte Rice.
7 Div. 681..
Alabama Court of Appeals.
Jun 14, 1921.
89 So. 894
Hill, Hill, Whiting Thomas, of Montgomery, and Guy Rice, of Prattville, for appellant. The defendant was not a fugitive from justice, and was entitled to show that he was not. 73 Ala. 503 , 49 Am. Rep. 63; 142 Ala. 72 , 39 So. 55 ; 144 Ala. 140 , 39 So. 249 ; 152 Ala. 68 , 44 So. 685 ; 174 Ala. 1 , 56 So. 735 ; 17 Ala. App. 405 , 85 So. 590 ; 16 Ala. App. 397 , 78 So. 313 ; 19 Cyc. 94. The state failed to make out a prima facie case, and this entitled the defendant to his discharge. Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., for appellee. Brief of counsel did not reach the Reporter.
Merritt.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
MERRITT, J.

The petitioner filed his petition for habeas corpus before the judge of probate of Talladega county, alleging that he was being held and illegally restrained of his liberty in tire county jail by one Cornett; sheriff of said county. The judgment recites that “the relief prayed for in the petition is denied, and that petitioner be remanded to the custody of William Armstrong, agent for the state of Mississippi. The bill of exceptions recites that the state offered in evidence the warrant of lion. Thos. E. Kilby, Governor of Alabama, and the sheriff’s return on the writ of habeas corpus, and rested its case. Nowhere in the bill of exceptions does the Governor’s warrant appear, nor the sheriff’s return. The defendant offered testimony tending to show that he was not a fugitive from justice, and that he was not in. the state of Mississippi at the time of the alleged forgery. The bill of exceptions, also contains a recital that it contains all the evidence offered in the trial of the ease.

Granting, which we do not decide, that we may look to the record proper for the Governor’s warrant and the sheriff’s return, as stated in the bill of exceptions to have been introduced by the state, yet these would not make out a prima facie case for the state. There appears nowhere in the record a requisition of the Governor of Mississippi on the Governor of Alabama charging the petitioner with being a fugitive from justice from the state of Mississippi; neither does there appear a copy of any affidavit or indictment against the petitioner, all of which was necessary to make out a prima facie case against petitioner. Until this was done there was no duty on petitioner to act. Ex parte Fitzgerald v. State, 90 South. 45; [1] Godwin v. State, 16 Ala. App. 397, 78 South. 313; Ex parte Forbes, 17 Ala. App. 405, 85 South. 590; Barriere v. State, 142 Ala. 72, 39 South. 55; Singleton v. State, 144 Ala. 104, 42 South. 23.

The state having failed to make out a prima facie case against the petitioner, the judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded,

1

Ante, p. 115,