 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Abdeldayem v. State, CR-05-2039,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 29, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was reversed as inmate's due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment and Ala. Const. art. I, § 6 were violated because the trial court's orders and the State's response were served on the inmate, rather than his counsel as required by Ala. R., Crim. P. 32.7(a), 34.4, and 34.5.
|
|||||
| Ala. Bd. of Nursing v. Peterson, 2060131,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 29, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although a nurse violated Ala. Code § 34-21-22(c) when she used a designation for a licensed practical nurse on a sign-in sheet at an employee orientation because she was not licensed at the time, a revocation of her license was inappropriate because there was no reason for such under Ala. Code § 34-21-25(b).
|
|||||
| Allen v. State, CR-06-0070,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 29, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's claims in his Ala. R. Crim. P. 32 petition concerning the application of the Habitual Felony Offender Act (HFOA) to his sentence were without merit as his voluntary admission that he had two prior felony offenses dispensed with the notice requirement and the State's obligation to prove the offenses under Ala. Code § 13A-5-9 (1975).
|
|||||
| Berube v. Lefebvre, 2060312,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 29, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Subsequent property purchasers could not prevent use of boat slip and pier on their property by adjacent property owners because those owners had purchased property based on agreement with the prior owner that they could have use of the boat slip; thus, they had an irrevocable license. Further, the subsequent owners had knowledge of the agreement.
|
|||||
| Blythe v. Blythe, 2050926,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 29, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because: a divorce decree ordering that the parties' marital property be equally divided did not actually divide said property; left unadjudicated claims; and the order purporting to certify the judgment as final neither cited Ala. R. Civ. P. 54(b), nor used its language, the husband's appeal was from a nonfinal judgment, and was thus dismissed.
|
|||||
| Broadnax v. State, CR-04-2141,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 29, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was reversed as allowing inmate's second amendment under Ala. R. Crim. P. 32.7(b) to inmate's Ala. R. Crim. P. 32 petition would not have unduly prejudiced State as State would have been required to respond only to new and expanded claims, and merely having to respond to amendment, alone, did not constitute undue prejudice.
|
|||||
| Brown v. State, CR-04-0293,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 29, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Murder conviction and death penalty were affirmed because the trial court did not commit errors during the jury selection that denied defendant a fair trial, the prosecutor's comments did not deny defendant a fair trial, the trial court properly instructed the jury, and the imposition of the death penalty was not inappropriate.
|
|||||
| Burton v. State, CR-05-1879,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 29, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Verdicts convicting appellant of reckless murder and first-degree arson under Ala. Code §§ 13A-6-2(a)(2) and 13A-7-41 were not mutually exclusive because no element of either offense negated element of other. Thus, jury reasonably concluded that appellant acted with requisite intent to commit each crime, and victim died as result of both actions.
|
|||||
| Casteel v. State, CR-06-0720,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 29, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because appellant was not represented by counsel when he moved to withdraw his guilty plea, a critical stage of the proceedings, he had not waived his right to counsel, and, in fact, he had requested appointment of counsel with respect to the motion, he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to counsel and was entitled to an out-of-time appeal.
|
|||||
| City of Decatur v. Lindsey, CR-06-0806,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 29, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's DUI case under Decatur, Ala., Code § 16-1 was improperly dismissed because the maximum fine of $5,000 did for conduct that constituted a violation of Ala. Code § 32-5A-191 did not exceed the amount in Ala. Code § 11-45-9(b); therefore, Decatur, Ala., Code § 16-1 was not void.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
