Bryant v. State
Decision Date | 04 February 2011 |
Docket Number | CR–08–0405. |
Citation | 181 So.3d 1087 |
Parties | Jerry Devane BRYANT v. STATE of Alabama. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Alabama Supreme Court 1140203.
Barry Johnson Parker, Mobile; Tamra Domeyer, Warrenville, IL; John Gallo and Serena B. Lee, Chicago, IL; Glenn Newman, Chicago, IL; and Emily Caveness, San Francisco, CA, for appellant.
Troy King, atty. gen., and Thomas Govan, Jr., asst. atty. gen., for appellee.
Jerry Devane Bryant, an inmate on death row at Holman Correctional Facility, appeals the circuit court's summary dismissal of his petition for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Rule 32, Ala. R.Crim. P.
In 1998, Bryant was convicted of the murder of Donald Hollis made capital because it was committed during the course of a kidnapping, see § 13A–5–40(a)(1), Ala.Code 1975, and was sentenced to death. This Court affirmed Bryant's conviction and sentence on direct appeal. Bryant v. State, 951 So.2d 702 (Ala.Crim.App.1999). The Alabama Supreme Court affirmed Bryant's conviction, but reversed his death sentence, and remanded the case to this Court to remand the case to the trial court for a new penalty-phase trial. Ex parte Bryant, 951 So.2d 724 (Ala.2002). In accordance with the Supreme Court's instructions, this Court remanded the case for a new penalty-phase trial. Bryant v. State, 951 So.2d 732 (Ala.Crim.App.2003). After a new penalty-phase trial, Bryant was again sentenced to death, and this Court affirmed his sentence. Id. ( ). The Alabama Supreme Court denied certiorari review, and this Court issued a certificate of judgment on September 29, 2006. The United States Supreme Court subsequently denied certiorari review on April 2, 2007. Bryant v. Alabama, 549 U.S. 1324, 127 S.Ct. 1909, 167 L.Ed.2d 569 (2007).
Bryant timely filed his Rule 32 petition on September 26, 2007, raising numerous claims, including several claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The State filed an answer and a motion to dismiss Bryant's petition on January 10, 2008. On February 21, 2008, Bryant filed a "Motion for Discovery of Institutional Files, Records, and Information Necessary to a Fair Rule 32 Evidentiary Hearing," wherein he requested numerous items. (C. 389.) The circuit court denied the request on February 26, 2008, with a notation on the case-action summary stating (C. 426.) Bryant filed an amended petition on March 21, 2008, in which he reasserted the claims raised in his original petition, expanding on some of them with additional factual pleadings, and raised additional claims as well. The State filed an answer and a motion to dismiss the amended petition on May 21, 2008. Bryant filed a response to the State's answer and motion to dismiss on August 21, 2008, and on October 3, 2008, he filed a motion for reconsideration of his discovery request, which motion was denied by the circuit court on October 13, 2008, with a notation on the case-action summary simply stating "Motion to Reconsider Discovery Order denied." (C. 756.) On October 27, 2008, the circuit court issued an order summarily dismissing all the claims in Bryant's amended petition1 on the grounds that the claims were insufficiently pleaded, were meritless on their face, or were procedurally barred. Bryant filed a motion to reconsider on November 21, 2008, which the circuit court denied on December 3, 2008. Bryant filed a notice of appeal on December 4, 2008.
In our original opinion affirming Bryant's conviction and the death sentence initially imposed, this Court set out the facts of the crime as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Lewis v. State
...apparent belief, 'not turn[ing] over evidence is not the equivalent of suppressing evidence for purposes of Brady." Bryant, 181 So. 3d 1087, 1123 (Ala. Crim. App. 2011). Parkman knew about the alleged report but did not ask for a copy of it. Thus, Lewis did not prove a violation of Brady. S......
-
Saunders v. Stewart
...be true, it is obviously without merit or is precluded, the circuit court may summarily dismiss that petition.'" Bryant v. State, 181 So. 3d 1087, 1102 (Ala. Crim. App. 2011) (emphasis in original) (internal brackets omitted) (quoting Bishop v. State, 608 So. 2d 345, 347-48 (Ala. 1992)). Se......
-
Taylor v. Dunn
...of the Supreme Court's remand instructions"); Morrissette v. State, 183 So.3d 1009, 1012 n.3 (Ala.Crim.App. 2014); Bryant v. State, 181 So.3d 1087, 1136 (Ala.Crim.App. 2014); S.A.R. v. State, 99 So.3d 1260, 1264 (Ala.Crim.App. 2012); Hyde v. State, 894 So.2d 808, 810 (Ala.Crim.App. 2004). I......
-
Lewis v. State
...belief, ‘not turn[ing] over evidence is not the equivalent of suppressing evidence for purposes of Brady." Bryant v. State, 181 So. 3d 1087, 1123 (Ala. Crim. App. 2011). Parkman knew about the alleged report but did not ask for a copy of it. Thus, Lewis did not prove a violation of Brady. S......
-
GOOGLING A MISTRIAL: ONLINE JUROR MISCONDUCT IN ALABAMA.
...at 496. (80) Id. at 494 (citing Ex parte Stewart, 659 So. 2d 122 (Ala. 1993)). (81) See id. (82) Id. at 495 (quoting Bryant v. State, 181 So. 3d 1087, 1125 (Ala. Crim. App. (83) "In real life" or "In real world" internet abbreviation or slang. (84) Debra Cassens Weiss, Media Atwitter Over A......