Ex parte Rivers, CR-94-2335
Decision Date | 03 October 1995 |
Docket Number | CR-94-2335 |
Citation | 669 So.2d 239 |
Parties | Ex parte Robert RIVERS, William Humphries, Michael Mcabee, Antonio Noland, Debra Petterson, Brenda Pickard, Jeremy Boatner, Orlando Robinson, Roger Wilson. (In re State of Alabama v. Robert Rivers, et al.). |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Petition for writ of Mandamus to the Tuscaloosa Circuit Court (CC-94-1020); Thomas S. Wilson, Judge.
Robert V. Wooldridge, III, Public Defender, Tuscaloosa, for Petitioners.
Jeff Sessions, Atty. Gen., and Cedric Colvin, Asst. Atty. Gen., Charles Freeman, District Atty., Tuscaloosa, for Appellee.
The petitioners filed this petition for a writ of mandamus against the Honorable Thomas Wilson after Judge Wilson denied their applications for probation. The court, in denying the petitioners' applications, relied on White v. State, 650 So.2d 538 (Ala.Cr.App.1994), and held that because the applications had been pending for more than 60 days they were deemed denied by operation of law pursuant to Rule 24.4, Ala.R.Crim.P. This rule states:
Initially, we must determine whether a writ of mandamus is the appropriate remedy in this case. Ex parte Cox, 451 So.2d 235, 239 (Ala.1983). The appellants have no remedy by way of appeal, as this court recently observed in Gilmore v. State, 669 So.2d 239, 239 (Ala.Cr.App.1995).
Because the petitioners have no adequate remedy by way of appeal, a petition for the writ of mandamus is the appropriate method to challenge the trial court's rulings.
An application for probation is not a motion for a new trial or a motion in arrest of judgment so as to come within the strictures of Rule 24.4. It is an application, which must be evaluated. An application for probation requires an investigation by a probation officer before the court can grant or deny the application. Section 15-22-51, Code of Alabama 1975, provides, in part:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Capote v. State
...same facts can be inferred." White v. State, 650 So. 2d 538, 541 (Ala. Crim. App. 1994), overruled on other grounds, Ex parte Rivers, 669 So. 2d 239 (Ala. Crim. App. 1995). Inv. Holland's testimony about the identifications was cumulative to the testimony of Hammonds and Bates; therefore, a......
-
Wilson v. State
...See Rule 45, Ala. R. App. P.; White v. State, 650 So.2d 538 (Ala. Cr. App. 1994), overruled on other grounds, Ex parte Rivers, 669 So.2d 239 (Ala. Cr. App. 1995). Finally, the appellant contends that the State improperly elicited testimony that one of the first officers to respond to the cr......
-
Wilson v. State
...admitted. See Rule 45, Ala. R.App. P.; White v. State, 650 So.2d 538 (Ala.Cr. App.1994), overruled on other grounds, Ex parte Rivers, 669 So.2d 239 (Ala.Cr.App. 1995). Finally, the appellant contends that the State improperly elicited testimony that one of the first officers to respond to t......
-
McNabb v. State
...149 L.Ed.2d 311 (2001), quoting White v. State, 650 So.2d 538, 541 (Ala.Crim.App.1994), overruled on other grounds, Ex parte Rivers, 669 So.2d 239 (Ala.Crim.App.1995). See also Dawson v. State, 675 So.2d 897, 900 (Ala.Crim.App.1995), aff'd, 675 So.2d 905 (Ala.1996) ("The erroneous admission......