 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Brooks v. State, CR-03-1113,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 30, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a capital murder case, the trial court properly refused to suppress defendant's confession since, under the totality of the circumstances, it was found that defendant was advised of his Miranda rights four different times, he indicated he understood his rights, he had prior criminal justice system experience, and no objections were made.
|
|||||
| Brown v. Tarver, 2050371,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 30, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a caregiver had failed to show that a decedent's father and daughter had been contractually obligated to pay her after the decedent's death, or that they had been the party that had placed a stop-payment order on a check, a judgment in her favor was not supported, and an ore tenus judgment was not entitled to a presumption of correctness.
|
|||||
| Butler v. State, CR-05-0189,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 30, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When in considering a motion under Ala. Code § 13A-5-9.1, the trial court originally relied only upon defendant's prior offenses to determine that he was a nonviolent offender, it later properly determined, based on a consideration of all of the factors and including defendant's current offenses, that its first ruling exceeded its discretion.
|
|||||
| Cobb v. State, CR-05-0422,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 30, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When appellant, who had been charged with first-degree robbery, pleaded guilty to second-degree robbery, it was error not to amend the indictment under Ala. R. Crim. P. 13.5(a) to include the allegation that he was aided by another person who had actually been present at the robbery. It was not enough that the record support the lesser charge.
|
|||||
| Denbo v. DeBray, 1041430,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, June 30, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendants were properly granted summary judgment because plaintiffs' legal malpractice action was time-barred under Ala. Code § 6-5-574, regardless of whether the "occurrence" approach or the "damage" approach was employed to determine when the statute of limitations began to run.
|
|||||
| Duck v. State, CR-05-1083,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 30, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erroneously dismissed appellant's Ala. R. Crim. P. 32 postconviction relief petition. It lacked jurisdiction to accept appellant's guilty plea to amended first-degree unlawful possession of marijuana charge where indictment charged him with second-degree unlawful possession, as latter offense was not contemplated in original indictment.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Gregory, 1050425,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, June 30, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petitioner, resident of Colorado and Tennessee with no contacts with Alabama, was entitled to mandamus relief where trial court denied his summary judgment motion under Ala. R. Civ. P. 56 in underlying personal injury action. Effects test did not apply to petitioner's alleged negligence in Colorado, as test applied only to intentional torts.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Seymour, 1050597,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, June 30, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where appellant, who had been convicted of shooting into an occupied building, failed to raise his defective-indictment claim at trial or on direct appeal, his claim was barred by Ala. R. Crim. P. 32.2(a)(3) and (5). Therefore, the trial court properly denied appellant's petition for postconviction relief.
|
|||||
| Gray v. Gray, 1050143,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, June 30, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Probate court erred in awarding a decedent's son a share of the decedent's estate under the pretermitted child statute because an exception to the pretermitted child rule under Ala. Code § 43-8-91(a)(2) applied, as the decedent had two other children and his will devised all of his estate to his wife, the son's mother.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
