Franklin v. State
| Decision Date | 15 July 1986 |
| Docket Number | 4 Div. 357 |
| Citation | 502 So.2d 821 |
| Parties | Randy FRANKLIN v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Michael S. Jazwinski of Prestwood, Prestwood, Sansom & Jazwinski, Andalusia, for appellant.
Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen. and P. David Bjurberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Randy Franklin was convicted of arson in the second degree, a violation of § 13A-7-42(a), Code of Alabama 1975, and sentenced to ten years' imprisonment. The building that was burned was set on fire twice, once on the night of December 19, 1983, and then again on the morning of December 22, 1983. The appellant requested the prosecution to choose which fire he was being charged with having set. The prosecutor responded by stating that he was proceeding against appellant with the second fire.
The evidence showed that on December 19, 1983, at 9:08 p.m., the Andalusia Fire Department received an alarm indicating that a house was on fire. Fireman Steele responded and found some of the rooms "engulfed in flames." He testified as follows:
Fireman Steele further testified that, at 11:51 a.m. on December 22, 1983, the following occurred:
On cross-examination, Fireman Steele testified in part as follows:
The appellant's grandmother testified on his behalf. She testified that on the morning of the second fire, appellant came by her home "about between eight or nine," and that she told him she wanted to go to the hospital to see her son. On the way to the hospital they drove by appellant's house at "9:30 or after 9:30." He went in the house for "four or five minutes" and came back to the automobile, and they then went to the "Little Kitchen," where they had something to eat and then went to the hospital. Her testimony continued in part as follows:
The defendant took the stand and denied that he was guilty of setting fire to the house. We quote the following from his testimony on direct examination:
Appellant urges that the trial court erred in denying "Defendant's Motion to Suppress all the evidence produced by the warrantless search." He relies on Michigan v. Clifford, 464 U.S. 287, 104 S.Ct. 641, 78 L.Ed.2d 477 (1984), which held that a search warrant is required if the primary object of the search is to gather evidence of criminal activity rather than to determine the cause and origin of the fire. Here, the primary object of the investigation and search of the premises immediately after the call to the premises on December 19 and thereafter on December 22, was to determine the cause and origin of the fire, not to gather evidence of criminal activity.
Appellant next contends that since he was charged with having set the second fire, evidence regarding the first fire was not admissible. ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McWhorter v. State
...should be returned." 394 So.2d at 403. An "Allen Charge" or "Dynamite Charge" is permissible if it is not coercive. See Franklin v. State, 502 So.2d 821 (Ala.Cr.App.1986), writ quashed, 502 So.2d 828 (Ala.1987). The trial court may also make reference to the expense of a new trial. See Wigg......
-
McWhorter v. Dunn
...be returned." 394 So.2d at 403. An "Allen Charge" or "Dynamite Charge" is permissible if it is not coercive. See Franklin v. State, 502 So.2d 821 (Ala.Cr.App. 1986), writ quashed, 502 So.2d 828 (Ala. 1987). The trial court may also make reference to the expense of a new trial. See Wiggins v......
-
King v. State
...should be returned." 394 So.2d at 403. An "Allen Charge" or "Dynamite Charge" is permissible if it is not coercive. See Franklin v. State, 502 So.2d 821 (Ala.Cr.App.1986), writ quashed, 502 So.2d 828 (Ala.1987). The trial court may also make reference to the expense of a new trial. See Wigg......
-
Bolden v. State
...706, 708, 75 So.2d 182, 185 (1954), overruled on other grounds, Ex parte Locke, 527 So.2d 1347 (Ala.1988). See Franklin v. State, 502 So.2d 821, 827-28 (Ala.Cr.App.1986), cert. quashed, 502 So.2d 828 (Ala.1987); Williams v. State, 474 So.2d 178, 181 The evidence in this case was also suffic......