Albert v. State, 1 Div. 45
Decision Date | 20 December 1962 |
Docket Number | 1 Div. 45 |
Citation | 274 Ala. 579,150 So.2d 198 |
Parties | James Marvin ALBERT v. STATE of Alabama. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Granade & Granade, Chatom, for appellant.
MacDonald Gallion, Atty. Gen., Bernard F. Sykes, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Roy E. Hicks, Montgomery, Legal Research Aide, for the State.
Appellant was indicted, tried and convicted of murder in the first degree and was sentenced to life imprisonment.
The State has moved to strike the court reporter's transcript of the testimony, and in the alternative to strike the transcript of the record on appeal, and to dismiss the appeal, because the transcript was not filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court within the time allowed by law; and because the transcript was not filed with the Clerk of this Court within the time allowed by law.
Appellant expressed a desire to appeal on November 1, 1961 when the judgment was entered by the lower court, it being so noted in the judgment entry. The trial court retained jurisdiction for ruling on appellant's motion for a new trial and denied the motion on January 4, 1962. The transcript of the testimony was filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court on March 24, 1962, some 80 days from the ruling on the motion for a new trial. Another notice of appeal was found in the record dated February 3, 1962, some 49 days before the transcript was filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court.
The governing statutes, § 827(1) and (4), Tit. 7, Code of Ala. 1940, as Amended, provide that the court reporter's certified transcript shall be filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court within 60 days from the date of the taking of the appeal or within 60 days from the date of the court's ruling on the motion for a new trial, whichever date is later.
Section 368, Tit. 15, Code of Ala. 1940, as Amended, concerns the manner of taking appeals in criminal cases providing two alternatives:
From the record it appears to us that appellant first elected to proceed in accordance with (a) above, and having so elected must be bound thereby unless some other date is appropriate for the computation of the sixty day period, because an appeal in a criminal case is deemed perfected if the defendant upon the rendition of a judgment expresses a desire to appeal (Relf v. State, 267 Ala. 3, 99 So.2d 216; McDaniel v. State, 39 Ala.App. 157, 96 So.2d 319; Campbell v. State, 182 Ala. 18, 62 So. 57; Sherman v. State, 15 Ala.App. 175, 72 So. 755; Ex...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bell v. State of Alabama, 23104.
...meticulous observance of procedural niceties (including time limits) in the taking of appeals is well demonstrated in Albert v. State, 274 Ala. 579, 150 So.2d 198 (1962), and Relf v. State, 267 Ala. 3, 99 So.2d 216 (Ala.1957).4 The only remedy to which strict time limits are inapplicable is......
-
Hairston v. State of Alabama, 71-2918 Summary Calendar.
...meticulous observance of procedural niceties (including time limits) in the taking of appeals is well demonstrated in Albert v. State, 274 Ala. 579, 150 So.2d 198 (1962), and Relf v. State, 267 Ala. 3, 99 So.2d 216 (Ala.1957). * * * Thus, it is apparent that once the six month time limit fo......
-
Goolsby v. State
...to appeal. McDaniel v. State, 39 Ala.App. 157, 96 So.2d 319 (1957); Ex parte Loyd, 275 Ala. 416, 155 So.2d 519 (1963); Albert v. State, 274 Ala. 579, 150 So.2d 198 (1962). There is not here involved the matter of any "out-of-time appeal". Messelt v. State, 351 So.2d 627 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977); ......
-
Shelby County Commission v. Smith
... ... increase their salaries to correspond with those of state troopers. The Circuit court granted the deputies' ... by several local acts passed in 1971, 1973, and 1976, 1 stating that salaries of specific sheriff's employees ... also asserts that the legislative scheme violates §§ 45 and 106 of the Alabama Constitution. Section 45 requires ... ...