Arthur v. State
| Decision Date | 22 February 1991 |
| Citation | 575 So.2d 1191 |
| Parties | Ex parte State of Alabama. (Re Thomas Douglas ARTHUR v. STATE). 1900220. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Petition for writ of Certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals (6 Div. 477). Appeal from the Circuit Court, Jefferson County, No. CC-87-577, N. Pride Tompkins, Judge.
Don Siegelman, Atty. Gen., and Andy S. Poole and William D. Little, Asst. Attys. Gen., for petitioner.
William Hovater, Tuscumbia, and H. Alan Gargis, Muscle Shoals, for respondent.
Prior report: Ala.Cr.App., 575 So.2d 1165.
WRIT DENIED.
I think that this case is distinguishable from Arizona v. Roberson, 486 U.S. 675, 108 S.Ct. 2093, 100 L.Ed.2d 704 (1988). I would reverse the judgment and remand the cause to the Court of Criminal Appeals.
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Arthur v. State
-
McGowan v. State
... ... Hurst v. State, 469 So.2d 720 (Ala.Cr.App.1985). Here, the appellant could have procured this information from the veniremembers themselves during voir dire.'" Arthur v. State, 711 So.2d 1031, 1080 (Ala.Crim.App. 1996) (quoting Kelley v. State, 602 So.2d 473, 478 (Ala.Crim.App.1992)), aff'd, 711 So.2d 1097 (Ala.1997). See also Williams v. State, 654 So.2d 74 (Ala.Crim.App.1994). Although the trial court denied McGowan's motions, it permitted the parties ... ...
-
McGriff v. State
... ... "`These comments were proper because they concerned the valid sentencing factor of [Arthur's] future dangerousness.'" Arthur v. State, 575 So. 2d 1165 (Ala.Crim.App. 1990), cert. denied, 575 So. 2d 1191 (Ala. 1991), quoting Tucker v. Kemp, 762 F.2d 1496, 1507 (11th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 478 U.S. 1022 (1986). Evidence indicating McGriff's future dangerousness was relevant and ... ...
-
Whitt v. State, CR-96-0349.
... ... Id. See also Coral v. State, 628 So.2d 954 (Ala.Crim.App.1992), aff'd, 628 So.2d 1004 (Ala.1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1012, 114 S.Ct. 1387, 128 L.Ed.2d 61 (1994); Arthur v. State, 575 So.2d 1165 (Ala.Crim.App.1990), cert. denied, 575 So.2d 1191 (Ala.1991) ... However, volunteered statements of any kind are not barred by the Fifth Amendment, and their admissibility is not affected by the holding in Miranda. Miranda, 384 U.S. at 478, 86 S.Ct. 1602; Williams v ... ...