Alabama, February, 2006, State Case law

Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!

Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!

State Courts - Alabama - February 3, 2006

Gray v. State, CR-05-0047, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free

Overview: Although the trial court had authority to sentence defendant for violating his probation, the five-year period of confinement imposed by the trial court exceeded the maximum period of confinement allowed under Ala. Code ? 15-18-8(a)(1); defendant was entitled to relief under Ala. R. Crim. P. 32 on his illegal-sentence claim.

Search Cases for Free

H & S Homes, L.L.C. v. Shaner, 1040444, SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free

Overview: Although the parties provided a method of selecting arbitrators in either their installment contracts or their arbitration agreements, the arbitration was due to be administered by the American Arbitration Association.

Search Cases for Free

Harris v. State, CR-04-0274, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free

Overview: Probable cause existed to search defendant's car, as an informant said it contained marijuana, it was seen where the informant said, defendant was nervous when a dog sniffed the car, and he said he had no key to it, even though he just drove it. Under the Fourth Amendment, its presence on private property did not require more exigent circumstances.

Search Cases for Free

Hatcher v. State, CR-04-1728, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free

Search Cases for Free

Jennings v. State, CR-04-0320, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free

Overview: Where defendant failed to show that various alleged discovery misconduct by the State caused him prejudice, his fair trial rights were not violated; further, there was no showing that remedies ordered by the trial court pursuant to Ala. R. Crim. P. 16.5 did not cure any potential prejudice due to lack of timeliness.

Search Cases for Free

Jones v. State, CR-04-1183, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free

Overview: Where defendant had not resided at his parents' house and they told him he could not stay there, he lacked standing to challenge a search and seizure of the premises under U.S. Const. amend. IV; similarly, he lacked standing to challenge a search of his mother's vehicle, which defendant stole, as he had no expectation of privacy.

Search Cases for Free

Madden v. State, CR-04-1201, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free

Overview: Because the indictments charging defendant with first-degree receiving stolen property under Ala. Code ? 13A-8-16 did not allege that he "intentionally" received, retained, or disposed of the property in question, they omitted an essential element of the offense; therefore, the trial court erred in denying defendant's Ala. R. Crim. P. 32 petition.

Search Cases for Free

Mann v. State, CR-04-1382, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free

Search Cases for Free

O'Callaghan v. State, CR-04-1941, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free

Overview: Transporting methamphetamine lab supplies was a "clandestine laboratory operation," barred by Ala. Code ? 13A-12-218, which was not void for vagueness for not stating where the manufacture had to occur, as venue was where the crime occurred, which was within 500 feet of a business. Possessing over one precursor substance did not have to be proved.

Search Cases for Free

Payne v. State, CR-04-2005, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free

Overview: Because defendant used a credit card without authority, he was properly convicted of fraudulent use of a credit card under Ala. Code ? 13A-9-14(b); however, because defendant's two prior Florida convictions were based on nolo contendere pleas, they could not be used to enhance his sentences under Ala. Code ? 13A-5-9(b)(1).

Search Cases for Free

Communities Portal