Hines v. State
| Decision Date | 20 June 1972 |
| Docket Number | 1 Div. 154 |
| Citation | 48 Ala.App. 297,264 So.2d 218 |
| Parties | George Edward HINES v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen., and Sarah V. Maddox, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
The Attorney General has moved that we grant an 'out-of-term (sic 'time'?)' appeal in this cause.
On May 11, 1971 the former appeal was affirmed without opinion. No application for rehearing was filed.
On June 30, 1971 the October 1970--71 term of this Court expired. This Court lost all jurisdiction of the appeal. Ex parte Hoback, 44 Ala.App. 613, 217 So.2d 826.
In Alabama a defendant--who has the over generous span of six months to make up his mind to appeal or not to appeal--gets but one appeal. Here that has been done. On the record filed in this Court there was no constitutional error. No compliance with Acts No. 525 and 526, September 16, 1963 was shown by appellant or his counsel.
Moreover, Hines under Supreme Court Rule 48 could have had a transcript of testimony sent to this Court at any time up to July 28, 1971 (six months from judgment) or the date of decision, May 11, 1971, whichever came first. Griffin v. State, 284 Ala. 125, 222 So.2d 710.
Hence, we decided the appeal on the record proper.
An out-of-time appeal has been suggested by some Federal judges as a means of having State courts keep cases for redecision. However, in the fauna of our jurisprudence 'there ain't such an animal.' See Ex parte Hammonds, 45 Ala.App. 468, 231 So.2d 922. In the absence of legislation, we see no occasion for artificial insemination to procreate a juridical bastard.
No ground of the Attorney General's motion would serve the office of a writ of error. Code, 1940 T. 15, § 383.
The motion is accordingly due to be and hereby is denied.
Motion denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ellison v. State
...and determine that there is no such creation as an out-of-time original direct appeal under our present Alabama practice. Hines v. State, 48 Ala.App. 297, 264 So.2d 218; Mitchell v. State, 54 Ala.App. 203, 306 So.2d 296, cert. denied, 293 Ala. 767, 306 So.2d We are thus confronted with the ......
-
Wade v. State
...there have been other applications for out-of-time appeals presumably to thwart Federal habeas corpus actions. Thus in Hines v. State, 48 Ala.App. 297, 264 So.2d 218, Cates, P.J. 2 'An out-of-time appeal has been suggested by some Federal judges as a means of having State courts keep cases ......
-
Malone v. State of Ala.
...since an out-of-time appeal was the relief which he sought. Wade v. State, 51 Ala.App. 441, 286 So.2d 317 (1973); Hines v. State, 48 Ala.App. 297, 264 So.2d 218 (1972); Ex Parte Hammonds, 45 Ala.App. 468, 231 So.2d 922 (1970); Ex Parte Hoback, 44 Ala.App. 613, 217 So.2d 826 (1969).3 Mr. Mal......
-
Upshaw v. State
...for an out of time appeal, this court has expressly rejected such a paradox as judicial legislation of the rawest kind. Hines v. State, 48 Ala.App. 297, 264 So.2d 218. The judgment below is due to Affirmed. CATES, P.J., and TYSON, HARRIS and DeCARLO, JJ., concur. ALMON, J., concurs in resul......