 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Alexander v. State, CR-06-0017,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was reversed as rebuttal witness's testimony that he had smoked marijuana with defendant in 2004 was not admissible to impeach defendant's credibility under Ala. R. Evid. 608(b) since witness's testimony was not inconsistent with defendant's testimony that he had not smoked marijuana between 1982 and July 2002.
|
|||||
| Brooks v. State, CR-05-2384,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant made a sufficient showing regarding the potential relevance and materiality of the victim's counseling records that he was requesting, the trial court abused its discretion when it refused to conduct an in camera inspection of those records.
|
|||||
| Brown v. State, CR-06-0391,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Capital murder conviction was affirmed; appellate court would not reweigh conflicting evidence presented at trial, defendant failed to properly preserve claims of jury instruction error, and under Ala. Code § 12-25-35, the trial court was not required to make specific findings when sentencing defendant outside the voluntary sentencing guidelines.
|
|||||
| Burch v. Moulton, 1050910,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a student lacked the requirements necessary to graduate and had been arrested for possessing illegal prescription drugs, the college officials were entitled to state immunity under Ala. Const. art. I, § 14, and did not abuse their discretion refusing to award the student a medical degree; the student's due-process rights were not violated.
|
|||||
| C.P. v. State, CR-06-0157,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant juvenile was improperly convicted of harassment under Ala. Code § 13A-11-8(a)(1)(b) because his statement to a fellow student to "blow" him did not cause the student to feel threatened as required by § 13A-11-8(a)(2) and because the statement did not invoke any immediate type of response from the student.
|
|||||
| Clements v. Clements, 2060044,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Using a former wife's valuations of marital assets and debts, she received 40 percent of the net marital estate, and her former husband's award was 60 percent. Therefore, the trial court's division of the marital estate was not plainly or palpably wrong or inequitable, as the husband alleged.
|
|||||
| Coleman v. State, CR-06-1242,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Circuit judge should have responded to inmate's recusal motion as under Ala. Canons Jud. Ethics 3, judge's impartiality in considering motion for reconsideration of 1994 habitual offender sentence might be questioned if, as inmate contended, judge was the district attorney at time of proceedings underlying prior convictions used for enhancement.
|
|||||
| Ducker v. State, CR-06-0436,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court violated defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel by forcing him to proceed on his motion to withdraw his guilty plea without benefit of counsel even though defendant requested a continuance to give him time to obtain counsel for the hearing. Motion to withdraw plea was critical stage requiring representation or a valid waiver.
|
|||||
| Eatmon v. State, CR-04-2241,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In light of evidence that defendant beat one victim with iron bar, kidnapped him and his wife, doused them with gasoline, and burned them alive, under Ala. Code § 13A-5-53(b)(3), his death sentence was not disproportionate or excessive when compared to the penalty imposed in similar cases.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
