Alabama, April, 2008, 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 - April 25, 2008

Classroomdirect.com, LLC v. Draphix, LLC, 1060739, 1060740, SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, April 25, 2008, Released
View this case - free

Overview: Trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing an LLC to use a trade name because it prohibited the LLC from using phraseology implying a relationship between it and a seller. The seller's Lanham Act suit was not an exceptional case mandating an attorney fees award under 15 U.S.C.S. ? 1117(a) when a jury awarded minimal compensatory damages.

Search Cases for Free

Ex parte Booker, 1070376, SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, April 25, 2008, Released
View this case - free

Overview: Defendant's Ala. R. Crim. P. 32 postconviction relief petition was properly denied after he pleaded guilty to capital murder because the petition did not allege a jurisdiction defect. Under Ala. Code ? 13A-5-42, the State's failure to present sufficient evidence to prove a defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt was a nonjurisdictional defect.

Search Cases for Free

Ex parte Dabbs, 1070606, SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, April 25, 2008, Released
View this case - free

Search Cases for Free

Ex parte Kennedy, 1061377, SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, April 25, 2008, Released
View this case - free

Search Cases for Free

Ex parte Norfolk S. Ry. Co., 1060374, SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, April 25, 2008, Released
View this case - free

Overview: When a federal court abstained from hearing a case under the Colorado River doctrine, that case was not considered as an action being prosecuted, for purposes of Ala. Code ? 6-5-440, and as a result, a petition for mandamus seeking dismissal of a state court action, based on the existence of the previously filed federal action, was denied.

Search Cases for Free

Ex parte Vulcan Materials Co., 1051184, SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, April 25, 2008, Released
View this case - free

Overview: Materials company's petition for a writ of mandamus to vacate an order requiring it to produce information a construction company sought in its requests for production of documents was granted in part. Discovery of the material company's involvement in other litigation was unduly burdensome and oppressive and not closely tailored to the litigation.

Search Cases for Free

Lingo v. State, CR-06-1633, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, April 25, 2008, Released
View this case - free

Search Cases for Free

M.H. v. State, CR-06-1626, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, April 25, 2008, Released
View this case - free

Overview: Defendant's sentence for first-degree sexual abuse was illegal because it exceeded the maximum authorized by Ala. Code ? 13A-5-6(a)(3). Ala. Code ? 13A-6-66 applied to the conviction, not Ala. Code ? 13A-6-69.1, because defendant committed the sexual abuse between 2001 and 2005, and ? 13A-6-69.1, did not apply to crimes occurring before 2006.

Search Cases for Free

Mashburn v. State, CR-06-0328, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, April 25, 2008, Released
View this case - free

Overview: Defendant was properly sentenced to death for five counts of capital murder because the trial court weighed the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, and the sentence was not disproportionate or excessive. Defendant committed two murders during two robberies and two burglaries and killed two people pursuant to one scheme or course of conduct.

Search Cases for Free

Wallace v. State, CR-06-1080, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, April 25, 2008, Released
View this case - free

Overview: Defendant was denied his right to a probation revocation hearing because the proceeding at which the trial court revoked his probation was not a probation revocation hearing under Ala. Code ? 15-22-54. No testimony was heard, no evidence was taken, and defendant, who did not waive his right to a hearing, was not afforded an opportunity to be heard.

Search Cases for Free

Communities Portal