 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Adkison v. Adkison, 2040542,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Husband's second postjudgment motion sought relief on same factual basis as his first postjudgment motion. Thus, second motion was in reality a motion to reconsider denial of first motion. Trial court did not have jurisdiction to entertain second postjudgment motion, so its order denying that motion was void, and appeal from it was dismissed.
|
|||||
| Busby v. State, CR-04-2306,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A circuit court should have made specific, written findings of fact as to each claim defendant raised in his motion to withdraw his guilty plea instead of summarily denying the motion on the same day that the State filed its response to the motion; thus, the case was remanded to the circuit court for it to make the requisite written findings.
|
|||||
| Byrd v. City of Citronelle, 1041789,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, March 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: City was properly granted summary judgment on a homeowner's negligent-design and negligent-construction claims, as such were time-barred. Further, summary judgment was also properly granted to the city on the homeowner's negligent maintenance claim, as she failed to present substantial evidence that the city breached a duty owed to her.
|
|||||
| Cannady v. State, CR-05-0312,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since record indicated that hearing officer in a prison disciplinary hearing relied on hearsay testimony as to statements made by eyewitnesses to alleged assault to find that defendant had committed assault, circuit court erred in summarily dismissing inmate's petition for writ of habeas corpus contending that his due process rights were violated.
|
|||||
| Cole v. State, CR-04-2227,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where one of the prior felony convictions used to enhance defendant's sentence under Ala. Code ¿ 13A-5-9 had been dismissed, defendant was entitled to a new hearing at which only one prior felony conviction was considered for enhancement purposes, despite the fact that the original sentence was within the permitted range of punishment.
|
|||||
| Davis v. State, CR-03-2086,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An inmate's possibly meritorious ineffective assistance of counsel postconviction claim, under Ala. R. Crim. P. 32, was procedurally barred as, under the law in effect, newly-appointed counsel could and did raise it in a new trial motion. The inmate was not mentally retarded, and error in excluding a social worker's cumulative notes was harmless.
|
|||||
| Dunn v. Davenport, 2040686,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because possession of a disputed parcel of property by two landowners was hostile within the meaning of that term for purposes of their claim of adverse possession, and they possessed said property for the 10-year period required in boundary disputes between coterminous landowners, they were properly granted summary judgment on said claim.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Greater Mobile-Washington County Mental Health-Mental Retardation Bd., Inc., 1041787,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, March 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A board providing mental health and mental retardation services could not claim sovereign immunity, under Ala. Const. art. I, ¿ 14, as the statutory scheme authorizing its creation did not provide it was "state supported" or under a state department's jurisdiction, nor was it shown that funds were legislatively allocated to support its facilities.
|
|||||
| Felder v. State, CR-04-2525,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Circuit court improperly summarily dismissed inmate's petition for writ of habeas corpus because State did not address inmate's specific claims, and thus, the facts alleged by the inmate, to the effect that certain charges and sentences had been vacated, should have been taken as true. Case was remanded to the circuit court for it to make findings.
|
|||||
| Gaddy v. State, CR-02-2247,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An inmate's claims that his counsel were ineffective in his capital murder trial during the guilt and penalty phases failed, as the claims were either procedurally barred under Ala. R. Crim. P. 32.2, they were not supported by proper argument pursuant to Ala. R. App. P. 28, no prejudice was shown, or there was no substantive merit to them.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
