 |
|
 |
|
|
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!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Anderson v. State, CR-05-0738,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 2, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel, agreed to accept the trial court's order of standby counsel so that he could represent himself, and did not attempt to use some type of "hybridized representation," court's denial of his request to represent himself violated his Sixth Amendment rights.
|
|||||
| Andrews v. State, CR-05-1872,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 2, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although a probationer did not object to the circuit court's failure to comply with Ala. R. Crim. P. 27.5, because the record indicated, inter alia, that the probationer was not informed of his right to counsel, Ala. Code § 15-18-175(d)(3) and the probationer's due-process rights were violated.
|
|||||
| Belisle v. State, CR-02-2124,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 2, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Murder convictions and death sentence were upheld where, inter alia, as jurors who initially indicated potential bias were rehabilitated during voir dire and majority of instances alleged to be hearsay did not constitute hearsay and in others, the testimony was merely cumulative of other lawfully admitted testimony and thus, any error was harmless.
|
|||||
| Brooks v. State, CR-03-1113,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 2, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a capital murder case, appellant's conviction of burglary under Ala. Code § 13A-7-5 was vacated as violating double jeopardy principles because the burglary underlying appellant's capital-murder-during-a-burglary conviction under Ala. Code § 13A-5-40(a)(4) was the same burglary that formed the basis for the separate indictment charging burglary.
|
|||||
| C.D.S. v. K.S.S., 2050873,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 2, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Juvenile court was directed to set aside judgment awarding custody of child to mother as judgment was void since juvenile court's adjudication of dependency petition resolved allegations of emergency as to child's emotional welfare and divested juvenile court of concurrent subject matter jurisdiction under Ala. Code 12-15-30(a) over custody issues.
|
|||||
| Corley v. State, CR-06-0276,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 2, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because it appeared that an inmate's argument might be meritorious, he was entitled to habeas corpus relief; the case was remanded for specific, written finding as to whether former Ala. Code § 14-9-41(g)(2) or Ala. Code § 14-3-38(c) governed the inmate's release date.
|
|||||
| Croshon v. State, CR-05-1903,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 2, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Revocation of defendant's probation on the basis of his positive drug test was proper because, even though defendant had not yet been given the express terms of his probation, refraining from committing further criminal offenses was an implied condition of every probationary sentence.
|
|||||
| Culbreth v. State, CR-04-2573,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 2, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because Ala. Code § 15-18-5 provided that an inmate was entitled to credit for the time spent incarcerated in the State of Washington, if that incarceration occurred as a result of a fugitive warrant issued by an Alabama circuit court when the inmate failed to appear for his trial, the inmate was entitled to habeas corpus relief.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Hamilton, CR-04-1751,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 2, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
