Calhoun v. State, 1 Div. 165
Decision Date | 25 March 1986 |
Docket Number | 1 Div. 165 |
Citation | 487 So.2d 265 |
Parties | Calvin CALHOUN v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Roosevelt Simmons, Mobile, for appellant.
Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and Victor Jackson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Calvin Calhoun was indicted for escape in the third degree in violation of § 13A-"10-"33, Code of Alabama 1975 and for driving under the influence of alcohol in violation of § 32-"5A-"191, Code of Alabama 1975. The jury found the appellant guilty of both offenses. The appellant received a twelve-month sentence in the DUI case and a two-year sentence in the escape case.
At approximately 9:30 p.m. on December 16, 1984, Officer Mitch Stuckey of the Monroe County Sheriff's Department received a call that several vehicles had been run off the road by a 1972 orange Cutlass Supreme. A short while later, Stuckey saw this vehicle on Highway 27 in Monroe County, Alabama. The front end of the vehicle was in the ditch.
Stuckey turned on his lights and exited his vehicle. Stuckey approached this vehicle and identified himself to the appellant, who was sitting on the driver's side of the vehicle. Although Stuckey was in plain clothes, he did have on his cap and his badge.
The motor of the vehicle was running and the appellant was trying to get the car into gear. Stuckey reached inside, turned the ignition off and put the vehicle in park. The appellant smelled of alcohol and Stuckey asked the appellant for his driver's license. When the appellant failed to produce his license, he was placed under arrest for DUI.
The appellant slid over to the passenger side of the vehicle and told Stuckey that he hadn't seen him driving and he wasn't going to jail. Stuckey walked over to the other side of the vehicle and asked the appellant to get out. When the appellant refused, Stuckey grabbed his arm and removed the appellant.
As the two were walking to Stuckey's vehicle, the appellant swung and hit Stuckey on the jaw. A struggle ensued and, at some point, the appellant managed to get away. The appellant was later apprehended with the assistance of his family.
He was then taken to the hospital where he received a neck brace and stitches in his head.
John Robinson testified that he had been driving the vehicle at the time it went into the ditch. There were some transmission problems with the vehicle and Robinson left the appellant in the vehicle and went to get some help.
The appellant testified that he was sitting in the passenger seat when Robinson left to go get help. He remained there until a vehicle approached. The appellant then got out and went to the hood of his vehicle. Stuckey got out of the other vehicle and walked toward him. Stuckey never identified himself and the appellant stated he did not know that Stuckey was a police officer.
At this point, Stuckey started beating the appellant. The appellant managed to get free and ran away.
I
The only issue raised on appeal concerns the following statements made by the prosecutor during his cross-examination of the appellant and during closing arguments.
The appellant's contention is that the prosecutor's questions to him and the prosecutor's remark during closing argument were prejudicial to him and should have been excluded from evidence.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Moody v. State
...part of the fact finding process. Green v. State, supra." Ex parte Brooks, 393 So.2d 486, 487-88 (Ala.1980). See also Calhoun v. State, 487 So.2d 265 (Ala.Crim.App.1986). This rule is not limited to civil suits between the State's witnesses and the defendant. Reeves v. State, 432 So.2d 543 ......
-
Satterwhite v. City of Auburn, CR-03-2095.
...a defendant concerning a civil action against a third party. Reeves v. State, 432 So.2d 543 (Ala.Crim. App.1983)." Calhoun v. State, 487 So.2d 265, 267 (Ala. Crim.App.1986). See also Gunn v. State, 387 So.2d 280, 283 (Ala.Crim.App.1980) ("While we have not found a case from this jurisdictio......
-
Hannah v. State, 6 Div. 227
...appellant's statement, which was in evidence, and not commenting on the failure of appellant to testify"). See also Calhoun v. State, 487 So.2d 265, 267-68 (Ala.Cr.App.1986). III The appellant argues that reversible error occurred when the trial court refused to allow him to publish photogr......
-
Burns v. State, 1 Div. 432
...part of the fact finding process. Green v. State, supra. Ex parte Brooks, 393 So.2d 486, 487-88 (Ala.1980). See also Calhoun v. State, 487 So.2d 265 (Ala.Crim.App.1986). "This rule is not limited to civil suits between the State's witnesses and the defendant. Reeves v. State, 432 So.2d 543 ......