Ex parte Pruitt

Decision Date20 July 1984
Citation457 So.2d 456
PartiesEx parte Talmadge PRUITT. (Re Talmadge Pruitt v. State of Alabama). 83-843.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

John Baker, Fort Payne, for petitioner.

Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

We deny the writ because defendant has failed to comply with Rule 39, A.R.A.P., in presenting additional facts not contained in the opinion of the Court of Criminal Appeals. In denying the writ, we are not to be understood as approving the holding of the Court of Criminal Appeals that "where a defendant denies the event in toto, the court is not obliged to charge on a lesser included offense." 457 So.2d 454 (Ala.Crim.App.1979). The accused is entitled to have the trial court charge on lesser included offenses where there is a reasonable theory from the evidence supporting defendant's position, regardless of whether the State or defendant offers the evidence. See Chavers v. State, 361 So.2d 1106, 1107 (Ala.1978). The Court of Criminal Appeals reached the correct result in Williams, a case "where the only reasonable conclusion from the evidence is that the defendant is guilty of robbery [the greater offense] or no crime at all." 377 So.2d at 637. If, however, the defendant denies the charge but the evidence presented by the State suggests a reasonable theory supporting a charge on a lesser offense, the trial court is obliged to give a charge on the lesser offense when requested.

WRIT DENIED.

TORBERT, C.J., and FAULKNER, ALMON, EMBRY and ADAMS, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
50 cases
  • Lindsay v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • March 8, 2019
    ...on a lesser included offense, the defendant is entitled to the charge ‘even where "the defendant denies the charge," Ex parte Pruitt, 457 So.2d 456, 457 (Ala. 1984), and [where] "the evidence supporting the defendant's position is offered by the State." Silvey v. State, 485 So.2d 790, 792 (......
  • Wright v. State, 1 Div. 86
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • October 22, 1985
    ...by the State nor that presented by the defense suggested a reasonable theory supporting a charge on a lesser offense. Ex parte Pruitt, 457 So.2d 456, 457 (Ala.1984). "A defendant is not entitled to charges on lesser included offenses where the only reasonable conclusion from the testimony i......
  • Connolly v. State, 1 Div. 965
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • December 10, 1985
    ...from the evidence supporting defendant's position, regardless of whether the State or defendant offers the evidence." Ex parte Pruitt, 457 So.2d 456, 457 (Ala.1984). However, a lesser included offense instruction must be given in a capital case, or in any other, "only when the evidence warr......
  • Daniels v. State, 1 Div. 92
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • November 26, 1985
    ...which he is charged does not automatically foreclose his right to jury instructions on any lesser included offenses. In Pruitt v. State, 457 So.2d 456, 457 (Ala.1984), our Supreme Court explained, as "In denying the writ, we are not to be understood as approving the holding of the Court of ......
  • 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