Carroll v. State, 4 Div. 137

CourtAlabama Court of Criminal Appeals
Citation445 So.2d 952
Docket Number4 Div. 137
PartiesGigi Elijah CARROLL v. STATE.
Decision Date01 November 1983

Page 952

445 So.2d 952
Gigi Elijah CARROLL
4 Div. 137.
Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
Nov. 1, 1983.
Rehearing Denied Nov. 29, 1983.
Certiorari Denied Feb. 24, 1984
Alabama Supreme Court 83-290.

Page 953

Jack W. Smith of Smith & Smith, Dothan, for appellant.

Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and H. William Wasden, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

HARRIS, Judge.

Appellant, Gigi Elijah Carroll, was indicted by the Houston County Grand Jury during the November, 1982 term on a charge of theft in the second degree. On December 13, 1982, she was arraigned and entered a plea of not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity. Trial commenced on the same day and the jury found her guilty as charged in the indictment. Appellant was adjudged guilty in accordance with the verdict and was sentenced to twelve years' imprisonment in the penitentiary pursuant to the Habitual Felony Offenders Statute § 13A-5-9, Code of Alabama 1975.

At trial, Fred Corbin, security manager of the southwest K-Mart department store in Dothan, testified regarding events of November 4, 1982. He stated that, while on duty at K-Mart, he observed Mrs. Carroll

Page 954

remove items of clothing from the racks and place them under the lid of a baby carriage and on her person. He followed Mrs. Carroll as she left the store through the service desk area without paying for the merchandise. In the parking lot outside of the store he stopped her and requested that she return to the store with him whereupon she attempted to evade him and rid herself of some of the merchandise. Both she and her baby carriage were, however, returned to the store's security office where the merchandise was removed from the carriage and from Mrs. Carroll's person.

The items, as evidence by the prices on the sales tickets, had a collective value of $86.80. Mr. Corbin testified that sales tickets on items sold at K-Mart were routinely torn in half at the time of sale and he identified three photographs depicting the items taken with sales tickets intact. He identified the merchandise in the photographs as the property of K-Mart Corporation and stated that Mrs. Carroll had no authority or permission to take the merchandise.

These facts were uncontroverted by Mrs. Carroll who testified in her own behalf. Her only defense was insanity. Other witnesses for the defense were her mother and her husband.

Appellant raises five issues on appeal. The first issue is whether Mrs. Carroll should have been arraigned after the jury had been impanelled even though a delay in arraignment was at the request of defendant's attorney.

This court, in Headley v. State, 51 Ala.App. 148, 283 So.2d 458, appeal after remand, 55 Ala.App. 303, 314 So.2d 905 cert. denied, 294 Ala. 758, 314 So.2d 908 (1973), observed that the only purpose of the arraignment subsequent to the abrogation of common law formalities is to obtain from the accused his answer to the indictment. Furthermore, in Newsome v. State, 49 Ala.App. 248, 270 So.2d 680 (1972), where appellant failed to appear for his arraignment and was not thereafter called upon to answer the charges against him in person this court stated that such an oversight could have been cured at any time...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 cases
  • Lawson v. State, CR-05-0010.
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • August 25, 2006
    ...Arraignment may happen any time before trial. In fact, a defendant may be arraigned after the jury has been empaneled. Carroll v. State, 445 So.2d 952 A defendant waives arraignment if he does not timely object to not being arraigned. "`Even arraignment and plea can be waived by a defendant......
  • Hamilton v. State, CR-93-2239
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • March 8, 1996
    ...of the mental competency of the accused to stand trial. Hawkins v. State, 267 Ala. 518, 103 So.2d 158 (1958)." Page 992 Carroll v. State, 445 So.2d 952, 954 (Ala.Cr.App.1983); see also McFarland v. State, 581 So.2d 1249 (Ala.Cr.App.1991); Taylor v. State, 507 So.2d 1034 (Ala.Cr.App.1987) ("......
  • Hamilton v. State, 7 Div. 443
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • May 13, 1986 addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court. McConico v. State, 458 So.2d 743 (Ala.Cr.App.1984); Carroll v. State, 445 So.2d 952 (Ala.Cr.App.1983). Absent a clear showing that it has abused its discretion, the trial court's decision will not be reversed on appeal. Dawkins v. Sta......
  • Frazier v. State, 6 Div. 999
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • October 28, 1986
    ...of the trial in this case, rather than immediately before the jury retires would not constitute reversible error. See Carroll v. State, 445 So.2d 952 (Ala.Cr.App.1983) (arraignment after jury impanelled held not improper), cf. Rucker v. State, 340 So.2d 825 (Ala.Cr.App.1976) (where defendan......
  • 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