Grider v. State
Citation | 766 So.2d 189 |
Parties | Eddie Wayne GRIDER v. STATE. |
Decision Date | 29 October 1999 |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Winfred N. Watson, Fort Payne, for appellant.
Bill Pryor, atty. gen., and Andy Scott Poole, asst. atty. gen., for appellee.
Alabama Supreme Court 1990569.
The appellant, Eddie Wayne Grider, was convicted of second-degree assault, a violation of § 13A-6-21, Ala.Code 1975. He was sentenced as a habitual felony offender to 32 years' imprisonment.
The appellant contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a court-ordered mental examination. Specifically, he argues that because of his mental problems he was unable to effectively participate in his defense at trial.
According to Rule 11.2(a)(1), Ala. R.Crim.P., the defense may petition the circuit court for "an examination to assist in the determination of the defendant's present mental condition and competency to stand trial." The Committee Comments to Rule 11.2 state, in pertinent part, the following:
"`Common sense, as well as sound legal authority, dictates that the trial judge not grant a psychiatric examination at state expense unless there is some reason to believe the accused was incompetent or insane.'" Wisdom v. State, 515 So.2d 730, 733 (Ala.Cr.App. 1987), quoting Bailey v. State, 421 So.2d 1364, 1367 (Ala.Cr.App.1982).
"
Allen v. State, 539 So.2d 1124, 1126 (Ala. Cr.App.1988).
In Thomas v. State, 766 So.2d 860 (Ala. Cr.App.1998), this Court stated:
The trial court's order denying the motion for a court-ordered mental examination stated, in pertinent part:
(C. 48-49.)
During the hearing, reports indicating the appellant's psychological state when he applied for Social Security disability benefits in 1997 were submitted to the trial court. Our review of the record indicates that, after reviewing the psychological reports, the Social Security Administration determined that the appellant suffered from various mental disorders and that because of those mental disabilities he was entitled to disability insurance benefits. (C. 44.) One of the psychological reports indicated that, although the appellant did not possess sufficient judgment to make acceptable decisions in an employment setting, he was cooperative, his "stream of talk and mental activity were normal," and his "response to questions was adequate and relevant." (C. 37.)
Here, the appellant produced no evidence that a mental illness rendered him legally incompetent to assist in his defense or to understand the nature of the charges against him.1 Furthermore, the trial court was able to observe the appellant's behavior during the motion hearing. Thus, the trial court did not err in determining that there was no reasonable basis shown for questioning or examining the defendant's competency.
The appellant contends that the trial judge erred in not recusing herself from the sentencing proceedings.
Canon 3C.(1)(a), Canons of Judicial Ethics, provides:
In Humphries v. Lynch, 579 So.2d 612 (Ala.1991), the Alabama Supreme Court stated:
Additionally, in Ex parte Cotton, 638 So.2d 870, 872 (Ala.1994), the Alabama Supreme Court stated:
In this case, before the sentencing hearing, the defense made a motion for the judge to recuse herself. In that motion, the appellant claimed that he had recently discovered that the judge had represented him in two assault cases when she was engaged in private practice, and that the judge had also represented opposing parties who had filed claims against him in a civil case. The trial judge stated that she did not recall dealing with any cases involving the appellant while she was in private practice. The trial court denied the motion and sentenced the appellant.
During the hearing on the motion for a new trial, the defense introduced court records that indicated that the trial judge had represented the appellant in two separate assault cases. The order of the trial court denying the motion for a new trial stated, in pertinent part:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Harrison v. State
...business and legal affairs, it was not sufficient to raise a bona fide doubt as to his competency. See, e.g., Grider v. State, 766 So.2d 189 (Ala.Crim.App.1999) (receiving Social Security disability insurance benefits does not alone establish that the recipient is incompetent), and M.D. v. ......
-
Wells v. Jones
...[v. Dugger], 819 F.2d [1564] at 1569 [(11th Cir. 1987)]."Medina v. Singletary, 59 F.3d 1095, 1107 (11th Cir. 1995); "Grider v. State, 766 So. 2d 189 (Ala. Crim. App. 1999) (receiving Social Security disability insurance benefits does not alone establish that the recipient is incompetent), a......
-
Ex Parte Atchley
...not automatically required to recuse himself or herself from presiding over the criminal trial of a former client. See Grider v. State, 766 So.2d 189 (Ala.Crim.App. 1999). See also In re Edwards, 694 N.E.2d 701 (Ind.1998); Carter v. State, 560 P.2d 994 (Okla.Crim.App.1977). Compare Davis v.......
-
Mcmillian v. State
...of body parts cannot constitute the use of a “deadly weapon” or a “dangerous instrument.” See also Grider v. State, 766 So.2d 189, 198 (Ala.Crim.App.1999) (Baschab, J., concurring specially); Harris v. State, 717 So.2d 868, 868 (Ala.Crim.App.1997) (Long, P.J., concurring specially).KELLUM, ......