 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Beason v. State, CR-07-2133,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in enhancing defendant's sentence pursuant to Ala. Code § 13A-12-270 because, although a sheriff's investigator testified about the distance from the location where the drug sale occurred to a high school, the State presented no evidence to establish that the sale occurred within three miles of a public housing project.
|
|||||
| Bishop State Cmty. College v. Soleyn, 1080179, 1080195,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although the Court of Civil Appeals applied the appropriate standard of review to the hearing officers' conclusions regarding the adequacy of the notices of proposed terminations under Ala. Code § 36-26-103(a), it departed from the clear language of the Fair Dismissal Act, Ala. Code § 36-26-100 et seq., by considering the surrounding circumstances.
|
|||||
| Byrne v. Galliher, 1080247,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As two policies enacted by the Alabama State Board of Education were internal-management policies, they were exempt from the definition of "rule" in Ala. Code § 41-22-3(9) of the Alabama Administrative Procedure Act (AAPA), Ala. Code § 41-22-1 et seq. Thus, the Board was not required to follow the AAPA in adopting the policies.
|
|||||
| Coach v. State, CR-08-0321,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the only evidence to show that defendant did not live at a certain address and that he had changed residences was a detective's hearsay testimony about the statements a resident made to him, the State did not present sufficient non-hearsay evidence to support the revocation of defendant's probation.
|
|||||
| Hawkins v. Lasalle Bank, 2070787,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment for mortgagee was reversed as mortgagor presented fact issue by presenting substantial evidence that he would lose his housing and that foreclosure sale en masse of three lots hampered his ability to redeem property.
|
|||||
| Lewis v. State, 1070647,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As residual doubt was not a statutory mitigating circumstance under Ala. Code § 13A-5-51, nor a "relevant mitigating circumstance" under Ala. Code § 13A-5-52, the trial court did not err in denying defendant's requested jury charge on residual doubt during the penalty phase of his capital murder trial.
|
|||||
| Martinez v. State, 1061237,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of inmate's postconviction petition was affirmed on grounds it was time-barred by Ala. R. Crim. P. 32.2(c). While inmate's certiorari petition was pending, the high court ruled that Rule 32.2(c)'s limitations period could be equitably tolled; therefore, intermediate appellate court had to afford him opportunity to argue equitable tolling.
|
|||||
| McKinney v. State, CR-07-1983,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| NHS Mgmt., LLC v. Wright, 2071129,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
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. |
