Gerbige v. State
| Decision Date | 12 October 1990 |
| Docket Number | 8 Div. 429 |
| Citation | Gerbige v. State, 571 So.2d 401 (Ala. Crim. App. 1990) |
| Parties | Ronald R. GERBIGE v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Cecil M. Matthews, Guntersville, for appellant.
Don Siegelman, Atty. Gen., and Sandra Lewis, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
AFTER REMAND FROM THE ALABAMA SUPREME COURT
Pursuant to Harris v. Reed, 489 U.S. 255(1989), we hold that the appellant's claim that the State failed to produce sufficient evidence to sustain his conviction of receiving stolen property in the first degree is precluded under Temp. Rule 20.2(a)(3) and (5), A.R.Cr.P. Appellant's claim that his appellate counsel was ineffective because of a failure to file a brief on direct appeal is without merit, Ex parte Dunn, 514 So.2d 1300(Ala.1987), because the appellant consented to his attorney's not filing a brief.
AFFIRMED.
All the Judges concur.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
2 cases
-
State v. McAdams
..."plain error" or "manifest injustice," even where the error was not brought to the attention of the trial court. See Gerbige v. State, 571 So.2d 401, 401 (Ala.Crim.App.1990); Aaron v. State, 300 Ark. 13, 14-15, 775 S.W.2d 894, 895 (1989), post-conviction relief denied, No. CR 89-58, 1991 WL......
- Bryant v. State, CR-89-403