Bibby v. State, 6 Div. 356
Decision Date | 28 October 1980 |
Docket Number | 6 Div. 356 |
Citation | 394 So.2d 73 |
Parties | Paul D. BIBBY, alias v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
James L. O'Kelley, Birmingham, for appellant.
Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., Sandra M. Solowiej, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Appeal from denial of writ of error coram nobis.
By petition for writ of error coram nobis, the appellant challenged his 1980 conviction for robbery and twenty-year sentence thereon. His petition, in pertinent part, is as follows:
At the coram nobis hearing, the appellant's trial counsel testified that prior to the robbery trial he discussed the charge with David Barber, an assistant district attorney. He said Mr. Barber told him that the robbery occurred on July 27, 1978, at approximately 5:10 p. m. The only alibi witnesses which defense counsel had available were the appellant's mother and girl friend. To the best of trial counsel's recollection, the first time he was apprised that the robbery in question took place on July 19, 1978, was during the course of the prosecutor's opening argument.
The appellant's sole contention is that the date of the offense was different than trial counsel had been led to believe it to be prior to trial and that the appellant's mother and girl friend were not called as alibi witnesses at the trial. However, the case is not that simple.
The evidence shows that there were actually two cases pending against the appellant at the time his trial counsel had a discussion with the deputy district attorney. Appellant's counsel in chief did not recall the date of July 19 being mentioned by Mr. Barber, whereas Barber's recollection and notes are to the contrary. He testified that in talking to appellant's trial counsel "two dates and two times were discussed as to each charge, as to the escape and as to the robbery." Barber further testified:
The record likewise reveals that the failure of trial counsel to call the appellant's mother and girl friend as alibi witnesses was not solely due to the conflicting dates on which the robbery purportedly occurred. Both the appellant's counsel in chief and associate counsel at trial testified on the coram nobis hearing that the two alibi witnesses were not used due to the unreliability of their proposed testimony. The appellant's associate trial counsel testified as to the girl friend that He said there were several discrepancies in Mrs. Bibby's stories which conflicted with the appellant's version of his whereabouts: "Mrs. Bibby said that he had been on work release and was working, and Paul said he had not worked for a several week period."
Appellant's counsel in chief likewise testified:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bass v. State, 6 Div. 664
...'highly exacting as to facts' and must convince the trial judge of the truth of the allegations in the petition...." Bibby v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 394 So.2d 73, 75 (1980), cert. denied, Ala. 394 So.2d 76 See also, Seibert, supra; Corley v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 397 So.2d 223, cert. denied, Ala......
-
Holsclaw v. State, 8 Div. 726
...proof of his assertions for relief." Seibert v. State, 343 So.2d 788, 790 (Ala.1977) (emphasis in original); Bibby v. State, 394 So.2d 73, 75 (Ala.Cr.App.1980), cert. denied, Ex parte Bibby, 394 So.2d 76 (Ala.1981); Summers v. State, 366 So.2d 336, 343 (Ala.Cr.App.1978), cert. denied, Ex pa......
-
Pinkard v. State
...petition, and the petitioner has the burden of rebutting the presumption of the correctness of the judgment of the trial court. Bibby v. State, 394 So.2d 73 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 394 So.2d 76 The transcript of the hearing on the petition for writ of error coram nobis clearly shows ......
-
Wadsworth v. State, 7 Div. 434
...in the petition, and the petitioner has the burden of rebutting the presumption of the correctness of the trial court. Bibby v. State, 394 So.2d 73 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 394 So.2d 76 The petition alleges that "Steve McCullars's testimony was not available to petitioner at the time of......