Ex Parte James R. Hall. (in Re: James R. Hall v. State of Alabama)

Summary

The court held that no fatal variance occurred where the indictment alleged theft of currency but the evidence showed that the defendant obtained the funds by depositing a check. Applying the material-variance and prejudice principles, the court concluded that the medium used to obtain the DAV's money was immaterial, that the indictment gave Hall adequate notice, and that his defense was not prejudiced. The court overruled prior Alabama precedent to the extent it required a contrary result and affirmed the conviction. Justice Shaw, concurring specially, agreed with the result while emphasizing that a variance is fatal only when it is material and could have affected the defendant's substantial rights.