Ex parte Nix
Decision Date | 25 May 1979 |
Citation | 370 So.2d 1119 |
Parties | Ex parte Charles Ray NIX. 78-508. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
To continue reading
Request your trial58 cases
-
Arthur v. State
... ... The Alabama Supreme Court reversed the appellant's first conviction, holding that details of the appellant's prior second degree murder conviction were improperly admitted at trial under the ... Page 1043 ... identity exception to the general exclusionary rule. Ex parte Arthur, 472 So.2d 665 (Ala.1985). The appellant was again convicted of capital murder and was sentenced to death by electrocution. However, this court reversed his second conviction, holding that the admission into evidence a statement made by the appellant to a police officer two weeks after the ... ...
-
Baxter v. State
... ... The State argues that the judgment in this case should not be reversed because the prosecutor did not intend to comment on the defendant's failure to testify and because he immediately corrected himself. In support of this argument, the State cites Ex parte McWilliams, 640 So.2d 1015 (Ala.1993) ... In Ex parte McWilliams, the Alabama Supreme Court stated that "`the facts and circumstances of each case must be analyzed to determine whether the language used was manifestly intended and was of such character that the jury would naturally and necessarily ... ...
- Smith v. State
-
Grimsley v. State
... ... He appealed to this court and we remanded this case so that the trial court could conduct a Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), hearing after considering the Alabama Supreme Court's decision in Ex parte Thomas, 659 So.2d 3 (Ala.1994). Grimsley v. State, 678 So.2d 1194 (Ala.Cr.App.1995) ... The trial court held a Batson hearing, found no violation of Batson, and filed a return to remand with this court ... "A defendant claiming a Batson violation must make a ... ...
Request a trial to view additional results