 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Birmingham News Co. v. Horn , 1020552, 1020553, 1020554, 1020555, 1020556, 1020557,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, November 24, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Claim that fair-market-value approach should have been chosen was not considered as it was raised for first time in application for rehearing; company originally argued only that lost future profits award was arbitrary, capricious, and irrational.
|
|||||
| Browning v. State, CR-03-0854,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, November 24, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate's enhanced felony DUI conviction was reversed and case was remanded for resentencing; the trial court improperly considered prior out-of-state DUI convictions for purposes of the felony enhancement.
|
|||||
| Bulger v. State, CR-03-0199,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, November 24, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a trial judge lacked authority to rule on a motion to reconsider a sentence, said ruling was void, and any appeal from the same was dismissed. However, with a motion pending in the circuit court, the inmate still had his appeal rights.
|
|||||
| Cont'l Cas. Co. v. Plantation Pipe Line Co., 1030369,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, November 24, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Insured presented substantial evidence to withstand motion for judgment as matter of law that oil leak occurred while its policy with insurer was in force, including expert testimony based on leak report and on chemical composition of contaminant.
|
|||||
| Crum v. State, CR-03-1480,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, November 24, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: where a circuit court failed to make specific findings of fact related to each material issue of fact that defendant presented in a post-conviction petition, a remand for such findings was necessary.
|
|||||
| Davis v. State, CR-03-1487,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, November 24, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion to suppress drugs discovered in a contact-lens case was erroneously denied where the State failed to show that removal of same from defendant's pant pocket was reasonable, and the officer failed to state that the item could have been a weapon.
|
|||||
| Dickey v. State, CR-03-1087,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, November 24, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant sped away while a police officer was reaching into his vehicle, sufficient evidence existed to support defendant's conviction for assault, as defendant caused injury to the officer and had the intent to do so by his actions.
|
|||||
| Eggers v. State, CR-02-0170,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, November 24, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's capital murder convictions under Ala. Code ¿ 13A-5-40(a)(1), (2) were affirmed; his arrest was lawful, as no search warrant was necessary, and the trial court properly denied his motion to suppress statements to police. There was sufficient evidence to find he murdered the victim during the course of both a kidnapping and a robbery.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Egbuonu, CR-03-1721,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, November 24, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Writ of habeas corpus was denied where the venue statute for an identity theft offense was not unconstitutional, said offense was, by definition, a continuing offense, and no constitutional provision limited venue to one county or to one state.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Rosborough, 1030565,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, November 24, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for theft was reversed because the statute of limitations had expired in that the crime was completed on the day he obtained money from his aunt under false pretenses, not the day the aunt discovered the deception.
|
|||||
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. |
