Adams v. State
| Decision Date | 26 October 1967 |
| Docket Number | 1 Div. 480 |
| Citation | 281 Ala. 432,203 So.2d 448 |
| Parties | Franklin E. ADAMS v. STATE of Alabama. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Franklin E. Adams, pro se.
MacDonald Gallion, Atty. Gen., and Paul T. Gish, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Appellant pleaded guilty to the charge of robbery and received a life sentence. He appealed and the conviction was affirmed in Adams v. State, 279 Ala. 608, 188 So.2d 914, July, 1966. On August 9, 1966, he filed a petition for writ of error coram nobis in the Circuit Court of Mobile County. The trial court granted the State's motion to dismiss the petition and this appeal followed.
The motion of the State to dismiss was based upon the fact that the court's own records showed that some of the allegations were not correct and that the petition did 'not raise any new points or questions that were not raised or which could not have been raised by the petitioner at the time of the trial and the appeal.'
The trial court properly dismissed the petition. Most of the allegations referred to matters which could have been raised at his trial on the charge of robbery.
The writ of error coram nobis is not intended to relieve a party from his own negligence, and facts known to the accused at the time of trial, and not brought to the court's attention through his negligence, afford no ground for relief. Eagen v. State, 280 Ala. 438, 194 So.2d 842; Ex parte Taylor, 249 Ala. 667, 32 So.2d 659.
Paragraph 8 of the petition reads:
The falsity of this allegation is shown in our opinion in Adams v. State, 279 Ala. 608, 188 So.2d 914, where we said:
We rechecked the original record and it shows that the trial judge questioned the defendant personally as to his understanding that he was changing his plea from not guilty to guilty. Witnesses were presented by the State to prove a strong case of robbery. Counsel for the State and the defendant argued the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jackson v. State
... ... The failure to raise an issue which could have been raised at the original trial or on the direct appeal bars the remedy of coram nobis review. Ex parte Boatwright, 471 So.2d 1257, 1259 (Ala.1985) (J. Maddox concurring specially); Ex parte Jacques, 409 So.2d 885, 886 (Ala.1982); Adams v. State, 281 Ala. 432, 433, 203 So.2d 448 (1967); Eagen v. State, 280 Ala. 438, 441-42, 194 So.2d 842 (1967); Thomas v. State, 280 Ala. 109, 110, 190 So.2d 542 (1966); Butler v. State, 279 Ala. 311, 313, 184 So.2d 823 (1966); Aldridge v. State, 278 Ala. 470, 474, 179 So.2d 51 (1965); Thomas ... ...
-
Bass v. State, 6 Div. 664
...of an appeal. Nor does it serve as a second review of those issues previously raised or not initially raised on appeal. Adams v. State, 281 Ala. 432, 203 So.2d 448 (1967); Butler v. State, 279 Ala. 311, 184 So.2d 823 (1966); Thigpen v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 374 So.2d 401, cert. denied, Ala. 3......
-
Little v. State, 6 Div. 958
...at the time of trial, and not brought to the court's attention through his negligence, afford no ground for relief." Adams v. State, 281 Ala. 432, 203 So.2d 448 (1967). The defects of which the petitioner complains constitute oversights and errors having nothing to do with whether or not hi......
-
Pitts v. State
...at the time of trial, and not brought to the court's attention through his negligence, afford no ground for relief. Adams v. State, 281 Ala. 432, 203 So.2d 448 (1967); Eagen v. State, 280 Ala. 438, 194 So.2d 842 In contrast to his testimony at trial, at the coram nobis hearing the appellant......