Hunt v. State
| Decision Date | 10 November 1994 |
| Docket Number | CR-93-1580 |
| Citation | 659 So.2d 998 |
| Parties | Charles Hoyt HUNT v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Melissa Bowen, Prattville, for appellant.
James H. Evans, Atty. Gen., and Tracy Daniel, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
The appellant, Charles Hoyt Hunt, was charged in a four-count indictment with theft of property in the first degree in violation of § 13A-8-3, Code of Alabama 1975; kidnapping in the first degree in violation of § 13A-6-43, Code of Alabama 1975; rape in the first degree in violation of § 13A-6-61; and sodomy in the first degree in violation of § 13A-6-63. In accordance with a plea agreement, the appellant pleaded guilty to theft in the first degree and kidnapping in the second degree, and the state dismissed the charges of rape and sodomy. The appellant was sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment on his conviction for theft and to 20 years on his conviction for kidnapping. The court ordered the appellant to complete a sex abuse program at the Bullock County Facility for the Treatment of Sex Offenders during his incarceration.
The appellant contends that his sentence is not authorized by law. He does not dispute the fact that a sentence of 20 years' imprisonment for each conviction is legal; he contends that the court cannot order him to complete a sex abuse program because he was not convicted of a sex crime. He also contends that because he was not informed that, as part of his sentence, he could be ordered to complete the sex abuse program, his plea was not entered knowingly and voluntarily.
The state argues in its brief that the appellant's contention--that his sentence is not authorized--was not preserved for appellate review. Matters concerning unauthorized sentences are jurisdictional and, therefore, can be reviewed even if they have not been preserved. Jones v. State, 585 So.2d 180, 181 (Ala.Cr.App.1991). In Ex parte Brannon, 547 So.2d 68 (Ala.1989), this court held that "when a sentence is clearly illegal or is clearly not authorized by statute, the defendant does not need to object at the trial level in order to preserve that issue for appellate review." 547 So.2d at 68.
The state also argues that the appellant's contention that he did not voluntarily enter his plea was likewise not preserved. Matters concerning the voluntariness of a guilty plea do not require preservation to merit appellate review. Gordon v. Nagle, 647 So.2d 91 (Ala.1994).
" 'Sentence' means the pronouncement by the court of the penalty imposed upon the defendant after a judgment of guilty." Rule 26.1(a)(2), Ala.R.Crim.P. The appellant pleaded guilty to theft and kidnapping and received the maximum sentence authorized by law for each of these convictions. § 13A-5-6, Code of Alabama 1975. Additionally the appellant was ordered to complete a sex abuse program. The appellant's convictions, however, were not sex related. The sodomy and rape charges against the appellant were dismissed. The trial court's order that the appellant complete a sex abuse program was not a punishment for any crime for which he was convicted but was instead a punishment related to the charges that were dismissed. Therefore, the court's sentence exceeded that authorized by law. It is elemental that a defendant may be punished only for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lewis v. State
...of parole — exceed the maximum authorized by law. "Matters concerning unauthorized sentences are jurisdictional," Hunt v. State, 659 So.2d 998, 999 (Ala.Crim.App.1994), and we may take notice of an illegal sentence even though Lewis did not raise the issue in the trial court or in his brief......
-
L.M.L. v. State
... ... we remand this cause for the trial court to determine when ... the offense in Count 19 occurred. Although L.M.L. did not ... raise this issue in the trial court, "[m]atters ... concerning unauthorized sentences are jurisdictional." ... Hunt v. State , 659 So.2d 998, 999 ... (Ala.Crim.App.1994) ... C.J ... testified that she was born in 1991, and as explained ... previously in this opinion, she described during her ... testimony a specific incident of rape that occurred when she ... ...
-
Wimberly v. State
...issues may be raised at any time, whether or not there was an objection raised in the circuit court. See Hunt v. State, 659 So.2d 998, 999 (Ala.Crim. App.1994). On Return to McMILLAN, Presiding Judge. The appellant, Shaber Chamond Wimberly, was convicted of two counts of capital murder for ......
-
Eugene Milton Clemons Ii v. State
...is consistent with established caselaw that holds that an illegal or void sentence may be challenged at any time. See Hunt v. State, 659 So.2d 998, 999 (Ala.Crim.App.1994) (holding that “[m]atters concerning unauthorized sentences are jurisdictional and, therefore, can be reviewed even if t......