Ankrom v. State (Ex parte Ankrom)
Decision Date | 11 January 2013 |
Docket Number | 1110176,1110219. |
Citation | 152 So.3d 397 |
Parties | Ex Parte Hope Elisabeth ANKROM. (In re Hope Elisabeth Ankrom v. State of Alabama). Ex parte Amanda Helaine Borden Kimbrough. (In re Amanda Helaine Borden Kimbrough v. State of Alabama). |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Paul Young, Enterprise; and Carmen F. Howell, Enterprise, for petitioner Hope Elisabeth Ankrom.
Jake Watson of Watson Graffeo PC, Huntsville; and Brian White of White & Oakes, LLC, Decatur, for petitioner Amanda Helaine Borden Kimbrough.
Luther Strange, atty. gen., and John C. Neiman, Jr., deputy atty. gen., and Cecil G. Brendle, Jr. (1110176), and Michael G. Dean (1110219), asst. attys. gen., for respondent.
Allison Neal, Montgomery, for American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama Foundation; and Alexa Kolbi–Molinas, New York, New York, for ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project, for amici curiae American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union, in support of the petitioners.
Kathryn A. King, Cullman, for amicus curiae Alabama Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, in support of the petitioners.
Lisa W. Borden of Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, Birmingham, for amicus curiae State Representative Patricia Todd, in support of the petitioners.
Mary Bauer, Southern Poverty Law Center, Montgomery; Tamar Todd, Drug Policy Alliance, Berkeley, California; and Emma S. Ketteringham and Lynn M. Paltrow, National Advocates for Pregnant Women, New York, New York, for amici curiae Southern Poverty Law Center, Drug Policy Alliance, and the National Advocates for Pregnant Woman, in support of the petitioners.
A. Eric Johnston, Birmingham; and Mathew D. Staver, Liberty Counsel, Maitland, Florida, for amicus curiae Liberty Counsel, in support of the respondent.
Mary Bauer, Southern Poverty Law Center, Montgomery; Tamar Todd, Drug Policy Alliance, Berkeley, California; and Emma S. Ketteringham and Lynn M. Paltrow, National Advocates for Pregnant Women, New York, New York, for amici curiae American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry, American Medical Women's Association, American Nurses Association, The Alabama Women's Resource Network, American Society of Addiction Medicine, Global Lawyers and Physicians, Institute for Health and Recovery, International Center for Advancement of Addiction Treatment of the Beth Israel Medical Center Baron Edmond de Rothschild Chemical Dependency Institute, National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum, National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women's Health, National Association of Social Workers, National Association of Social Workers–Alabama Chapter, National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, Inc., National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health, National Organization for Women–Alabama, National Perinatal Association, National Women's Health Network, National Women's Law Center, Our Bodies Ourselves, Southern Center for Human Rights, Sheila Blume, MD, Wendy Chavkin, MPH, MD, Nancy Day, MPH, PhD, Deborah A. Frank, MD, Leslie Hartley Gise, MD, Stephen R. Kandall, MD, and Linda Worley, MD, in support of the petitioners.
Mary Bauer, Montgomery; Tamar Todd, Drug Policy Alliance, Berkeley, California; and Emma S. Ketteringham and Lynn M. Paltrow, National Advocates for Pregnant Women, New York, New York, for amici curiae All Our Lives and Experts in Treatment of Addiction in Women, in support of the petitioners (and also joining in the brief filed on behalf of The American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry et al.).
Hope Elisabeth Ankrom and Amanda Helaine Borden Kimbrough (“the petitioners”) each petitioned this Court for a writ of certiorari to review the Court of Criminal Appeals' decisions in their cases. We granted the petitions and consolidated these cases, each of which presents the same issue of first impression for this Court's consideration: Whether the term “child” as used in § 26–15–3.2, Ala.Code 1975 (“the chemical-endangerment statute”), includes an unborn child. Concluding that it does and that the Court of Criminal Appeals reached the correct decision in both cases, we affirm the judgments of the Court of Criminal Appeals.
The Court of Criminal Appeals recounted the facts of Ankrom's case as follows in its opinion:
Ankrom v. State, 152 So.3d 373, 375–76 (Ala.Crim.App.2011). Ankrom was sentenced to three years in prison, but her sentence was suspended and she was placed on probation for one year. Ankrom, 152 So.3d at 375.
In its unpublished memorandum in Kimbrough v. State , 114 So.3d 163 (Ala.Crim.App.2011) (table), the Court of Criminal Appeals recounted the facts of Kimbrough's case as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. $223,405.86
... ... I. Facts and Procedural History On February 15, 2013, in Ex parte State of Alabama, 121 So.3d 337, 340 (Ala.2013), 203 So.3d 821 this Court issued a writ of ... The words of a law must speak for themselves. __________ " 6 See Ex parte Ankrom, 152 So.3d 397, 414 n. 8 (Ala.2013) (This Court will not rely solely on the views of a single ... ...
-
Tulley v. City of Jacksonville
... ... of fact based on that evidence are presumed to be correct, Ex parte Perkins, 646 So.2d 46, 47 (Ala.1994) ; [w]e indulge a presumption that ... State, 494 So.2d 750, 761 (Ala.Crim.App.1985), aff'd, 494 So.2d 772 (Ala.1986) ... Ex parte Hyde, 778 So.2d 237, 239 n. 2 (Ala.2000). Ankrom v. State, 152 So.3d 373, 379 (Ala.Crim.App.2011), aff'd 152 So.3d 397 ... ...
-
Hicks v. State (Ex parte Hicks)
... ... (References to the record omitted.) The Court of Criminal Appeals, relying on its opinion in Ankrom v. State, 152 So.3d 373 (Ala.Crim.App.2011), affirmed the trial court's judgment, stating: Hicks contends on appeal, as she did in the trial court, ... ...
-
Phillips v. State (In re Phillips)
... 287 So.3d 1179 EX PARTE Jessie Livell PHILLIPS (In re: Jessie Livell Phillips v. State of Alabama) 1160403 Supreme Court of ... As I stated in Ex parte Ankrom , 152 So. 3d 397, 429 (Ala. 2013) (Parker, J., concurring specially): "[T]he only major area in ... ...
-
State-created Fetal Harm
...use of the chemical endangerment law has continued unabated since the time of Amnesty International’s report. 33. See Ex parte Ankrom, 152 So. 3d 397, 416, 421 (Ala. 2013). The Alabama Supreme Court reaffirmed this approach the following year in Hicks v. State, 153 So. 3d 53, 66 (Ala. 2014......
-
LOWER COURT "DISSENT" FROM ROE AND CASEY.
...(Parker, J., concurring specially); Hicks v. State, 153 So. 3d 53, 72-84 (Ala. 2014) (Parker, J., concurring specially); Ex parte Ankrom, 152 So. 3d 397, 421-29 (Ala. 2013) (Parker, J., concurring specially); Hamilton v. Scott, 97 So. 3d 728, 737-47 (Ala. 2012) (Parker, J., concurring (90.)......