Braswell v. State
| Decision Date | 12 November 1974 |
| Docket Number | 5 Div. 255 |
| Citation | Braswell v. State, 303 So.2d 145, 53 Ala.App. 645 (Ala. Crim. App. 1974) |
| Parties | Tommy BRASWELL, alias v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
James Larry Lester, Opelika, for appellant.
William J. Baxter, Atty. Gen., and Larry R. Newman, Asst. Atty Gen., for the State.
This appeal is from an order of the circuit court denying appellant's petition for writ of coram nobis.
The record consists of the petition of appellant, supported by affidavit filed with the petition, and the judgment of the trial court after submission.No other evidence was offered on the hearing in the court below.
This court takes judicial knowledge that the appellant had been heretofore indicted, tried, and convicted of murder in the first degree, from which conviction he appealed and the conviction was affirmed.SeeBraswell v. State, 51 Ala.App. 698, 288 So.2d 757.
In the affidavit filed in support of the petition in the court below the petitioner based his case upon six different contentions, which we herein set out as follows:
Contention number 1 was decided adversely to the appellant on former appeal, since this court, after an examination of the record including the evidence contained therein, found no error to reverse.
Contention number 2 is not available to the appellant in the instant case, since it should have been (and apparently was) raised at time of trial and could have properly been raised on appeal.Kelly v. State, 45 Ala.App. 144, 227 So.2d 141.
Both parties in briefs discuss the failure of the court to grant appellant's motion for examination by a Sanity Commission to determine his sanity at the time of trial in the original charge.The judgment order in the record of the case at bar recites that a hearing was held by the court to determine this question, and the court overruled the motion.The evidence offered on the hearing would, of course, be a part of the record on appeal in that case.
This matter was for the determination of the court on appeal from the conviction and may not be considered in the instant case.Kelly v. State, supra.
Briefs from both the appellant and State in the case at bar discuss these and other matters which should have been raised on the original trial and appeal, but not at this time.
Where this is true, an appellant in a coram nobis appeal cannot take advantage of his own negligence in his failure in this respect.Passmore v. State, 51 Ala.App. 524, 287 So.2d 235;State v. Willis, 42 Ala.App. 414, 166 So.2d 917.
Contention number 4 was specifically dealt with by the court on appeal and was decided adversely to the defendant.This contention is, therefore, not available to the appellant in the instant case.Ex parte Rudolph, 276...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Thigpen v. State
...denied, 377 U.S. 919, 84 S.Ct. 1185, 12 L.Ed.2d 188 (1964); Seagroves v. State, 53 Ala. 481, 301 So.2d 245 (1974); Braswell v. State, 53 Ala.App. 645, 303 So.2d 145 (1974); Kelly v. State, 45 Ala.App. 144, 277 So.2d 141 AFFIRMED. All the Judges concur. ...
-
Little v. State, 6 Div. 958
...cannot take advantage of his own negligence in his failure to raise this matter at the time of pleading guilty. Braswell v. State, 53 Ala.App. 645, 303 So.2d 145 (1974). Coram nobis is appropriate only when the petitioner's claim is based on facts which were not known and could not have bee......
-
Browning v. State
...Ala. 667, 32 So.2d 659. In referring to certain claims of error set out in a coram nobis petition, this court said in Braswell v. State, 53 Ala.App. 645, 303 So.2d 145: "This claimed error could have been raised on direct appeal rather than by way of a coram nobis petition. The office of th......