
    (112 So. 902)
    CAMPBELL v. STATE.
    (6 Div. 917.)
    Supreme Court of Alabama.
    April 21, 1927.
    Rehearing Denied June 2, 1927.
    Certiorari (&wkey;>57 — Court of Appeals’ application of harmless error rule will not be reviewed on certiorari unless authorized by statement of facts in opinion.
    Supréme Court will not, on application for writ of certiorari, review Court of Appeals on question of application of doctrine of error without injury unless statement of facts in opinion authorizes review, since to look to record would necessitate review of facts or application of law to facts.
    Certiorari to Court of Appeals.
    Petition of C. P. Campbell for certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that court in Campbell v. State, 112 So. 901.
    Writ denied.
    Thos. E. Orr, of Albertville, and Prosch & Prosch, J. S. McLendon, and O. D. Street & Son, all of Birmingham, for appellant.
    Where the record shows that evidence has been erroneously admitted, prejudice will be presumed, and the burden is on the appellee to show affirmatively that no prejudice resulted. 4 C. J. 912; Tenn. Coal Co. v. State, 141 Ala. 103, 37 So. 433; Bolton v. Cuthbert, 132 Ala. 403, 31 So. 358, 90 Am. St. Rep. 914; Deal v. Houston County, 201 Ala. 434, 78 So. 809; C. of G. v. Teasley, 187 Ala. 616, 65 So. 981; Coffman v. L. & N., 184 Ala. 474, 63 So. 527; Brandon v. Progress Dist. Co., 167 Ala. 365, 52 So. 640; Shields v. Henry, 31 Ala. 53; Pool v. Devers, 30 Ala. 672; Thomas v. De Graffenreid, 27 Ala. 65S; Moore v. Olay, 24 Ala. 235, 60 Am. Dec. 461; Brown v. Grayson, 17 Ala. App. 463, 86 So. 121.
    Charlie O. McOall, Atty. Gen., for the State.
    Brief of counsel did not reach the Reporter.
   PER CURIAM.

Writ denied.

ANDERSON, C. J., and SOMERVILLE, THOMAS, and BROWN, JJ., concur.

On Rehearing.

PER CURIAM.

The Court of Appeals in disposing of the petitioner’s case applied the doctrine of error without injury to the matter now complained of, without stating the facts in the opinion on which the conclusion of error without injury was predicated.

The settled rule here is that we will not, on application for the writ of certiorari, review that court on such question unless the statement of the facts in the opinion is such as authorizes a review. This court will not look to the record in the case to determine whether or not the doctrine has been improperly applied, as this would necessitate a review of the Court of Appeals on the facts or the application of the law to the facts. Ex parte Steverson, 211 Ala. 597, 100 So. 912; Postal Telegraph-Cable Co. v. Minderhout, 195 Ala. 420, 71 So. 91; Kirkwood v. State, 184 Ala. 9, 63 So. 990; Ex parte Western Union Tel. Co., 183 Ala. 451, 63 So. 88.

Appli'cation overruled.

ANDERSON, C. J., and SOMERVILLE, THOMAS, and BROWN, JJ., concur. 
      <§=^Eor other cases see same topics and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     