Broaden v. State
| Decision Date | 08 July 1994 |
| Docket Number | CR-93-876 |
| Parties | Randall BROADEN v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Thadius W. Morgan, Jr., Enterprise, for appellant.
James H. Evans, Atty. Gen., and Rodger Brannum, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
The appellant, Randall Broaden, pleaded guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, to possession of cocaine, a violation of § 13A-12-212, Code of Alabama 1975, and to distribution of cocaine, a violation of § 13A-12-211, Code of Alabama 1975. He was sentenced to three years in prison on each case, those sentences to be served concurrently.
The state argues that the appellant's sentence is not correct and requests that this cause be remanded so that the appellant can be correctly sentenced. Specifically, the state contends that because the sale of the controlled substance occurred within three miles of a school, the appellant's sentence should be enhanced under § 13A-12-250, Code of Alabama 1975.
The record shows that the plea agreement provided that the state would waive application of § 13A-12-250 and recommend that the appellant be sentenced to three years in prison. The state now asserts, and we agree, that this enhancement provision cannot be waived. Section 13A-12-250 states:
"In addition to any penalties heretofore or hereafter provided by law for any person convicted of an unlawful sale of a controlled substance, there is hereby imposed a penalty of five years incarceration in a state corrections facility with no provision for probation if the situs of such unlawful sale was on the campus or within a three-mile radius of the campus boundaries of any public or private school, college, university or other educational institution in this state."
This court on many occasions has held that the enhancement provisions of § 13A-12-250 and § 13A-12-270, which provides for an enhanced sentence if the sale occurs within a three-mile radius of a public housing project, are mandatory. Cunny v. State, 629 So.2d 693 (Ala.Cr.App.1993); Burks v. State, 611 So.2d 487 (Ala.Cr.App.1992); McGee v. State, 607 So.2d 344 (Ala.Cr.App.1992); Green v. State, 586 So.2d 54 (Ala.Cr.App.1991).
" '[W]e believe that the legislature clearly intended to protect these areas ... from the evils associated with drug activities,' Qualls v. State, 555 So.2d 1158, 1165 (Ala.Cr.App.1989), and to provide for more serious sentences to those individuals who sell illegal drugs near schools or housing projects."
These statutes are mandatory. If there is evidence that would require the application of one, or both, of these statutes, the prosecutor should bring that evidence to the attention of the court so that the trial court may sentence the defendant accordingly.
In this case the appellant stipulated as to the factual basis for his plea. Therefore, it is not clear from the record whether there was evidence before the court that would require that the appellant's sentence by enhanced pursuant to § 13A-12-250. Ordinarily, we would remand this case to the trial court for a determination of whether the appellant should be sentenced under the enhancement provision of § 13A-12-250. However, because we reverse the appellant's guilty plea and remand the case on another ground, we need not remand the case for this reason.
The appellant contends that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
White v. State
...Handley v. State, 686 So.2d 540 (Ala.Crim.App.1996); Peoples v. State, 651 So.2d 1125 (Ala. Crim.App.1994); Broaden v. State, 645 So.2d 368 (Ala.Crim.App.1994); and Jones v. State, 624 So.2d 676 (Ala.Crim. Riley v. State, 892 So.2d 471, 474-75 (Ala. Crim.App.2004). Rule 14.4, Ala.R.Crim.P.,......
-
Riley v. State
...Handley v. State, 686 So.2d 540 (Ala.Crim.App.1996); Peoples v. State, 651 So.2d 1125 (Ala.Crim.App.1994); Broaden v. State, 645 So.2d 368 (Ala.Crim.App.1994); and Jones v. State, 624 So.2d 676 In this case, Riley was not properly informed when he entered his guilty plea of the minimum and ......
-
Heard v. State
...So.2d 214 (Ala.1994); Ex parte Rivers, 597 So.2d 1308 (Ala.1991); Anderson v. State, 668 So.2d 159 (Ala.Cr.App.1995); Broaden v. State, 645 So.2d 368 (Ala.Cr.App.1994); Henry v. State, 639 So.2d 583 (Ala.Cr.App.1994); Brown v. State, 611 So.2d 1194 (Ala.Cr.App.1992); Sampson v. State, 605 S......
-
United States v. Carter, No. 18-14806
...trigger "mandatory sentencing provisions." Maye v. State , 472 So. 2d 688, 690 (Ala. Crim. App. 1985) ; see also Broaden v. State , 645 So. 2d 368, 369 (Ala. Crim. App. 1994). The prosecutor's obligation to raise the location-based enhancement remains even if the defendant pleads guilty. Fr......