Brown v. State

Decision Date26 July 1991
Docket Number3 Div. 964
Citation586 So.2d 991
PartiesRaymond Eugene BROWN, alias v. STATE.
CourtAlabama Court of Criminal Appeals

Appeal from Montgomery Circuit Court.

Charles P. Hollifield and William R. Blanchard, Montgomery, for appellant.

Don Siegelman, Atty. Gen., and William D. Little, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

AFTER REMAND FROM THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

PER CURIAM.

On June 10, 1991, the United States Supreme Court 501 U.S. 1201, 111 S.Ct. 2791, 115 L.Ed.2d 966, vacated the judgment of this court in this case, see Brown v. State, 571 So.2d 345 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. quashed, 571 So.2d 353 (Ala.1990), and remanded the case to us for further consideration in light of Mu'Min v. Virginia, 500 U.S. 415, 111 S.Ct. 1899, 114 L.Ed.2d 493 (1991). We have carefully studied this decision.

Our original decision in this cause is distinguishable both on the facts and the law from Mu'Min. We maintain our original position that the trial judge abused his discretion in the denial of the request for the individual voir dire of the jury venire.

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR NEW TRIAL.

All the Judges concur.

TYSON, Judge, concurring specially.

While I concur in the order and judgment of this court as noted above, I am also of the opinion that this appellant was denied his right to due process of law and his right to an impartial jury as guaranteed to him by Art. 1, Sec. 6, of the Alabama Constitution of 1901. See Ex parte Webb, 586 So.2d 954 (Ala.1991); Ex parte Caffie, 516 So.2d 831 (Ala.1987).

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Brown v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • October 1, 1999
    ...remanded the case for a new trial, saying that this case was distinguishable from Mu'Min, both on the facts and the law. Brown v. State, 586 So.2d 991 (Ala.Cr.App.1991). The Alabama Supreme Court reversed this Court's judgment, stating that Mu'Min controlled and that Brown's conviction was ......
  • Brown v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • January 13, 1995
    ...trial court's judgment, holding that both the facts and the applicable law in this case are distinguishable from Mu'Min. See Brown v. State, 586 So.2d 991 (Ala.Crim.App.1991). On April 10, 1992, the Alabama Supreme Court reversed this Court's judgment, concluding that trial court had "acqui......
  • Parker v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • September 20, 1991
    ...cert. quashed, 571 So.2d 353 (Ala.1990), remanded, 501 U.S. 1201, 111 S.Ct. 2791, 115 L.Ed.2d 966 (1991), on return to remand, 586 So.2d 991 (Ala.Cr.App.1991) ], this Court thoroughly examined this issue and recognized that the general rule is that 'the decision whether to voir dire prospec......
  • Carroll v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • April 17, 1992
    ...judgment vacated and cause remanded for reconsideration, 501 U.S. 1201, 111 S.Ct. 2791, 115 L.Ed.2d 966, judgment retained, 586 So.2d 991 (Ala.Cr.App.1991). See Parker v. State, 587 So.2d 1072, 1078 The trial court properly denied the appellant's challenge to 21 1 venire members who indicat......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT