Isbell v. State, 6 Div. 55
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
| Writing for the Court | CATES |
| Citation | 42 Ala.App. 498,169 So.2d 27 |
| Decision Date | 17 November 1964 |
| Docket Number | 6 Div. 55 |
| Parties | Edward T. ISBELL v. STATE. |
Page 27
v.
STATE.
Edward T. Isbell, pro se.
Richmond M. Flowers, Atty. Gen., and Paul T. Gish, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
CATES, Judge.
This is an appeal from denial of relief under coram nobis. Under Ex parte Jenkins, 38 Ala.App. 117, 76 So.2d 858, had the appellant applied here for a writ of error, he would have got himself another trial, and, we may add, another sentence (even unto death) without credit for any time already served.
Originally Isbell was indicted for robbery, a capital felony punishable only by a [42 Ala.App. 499] jury. Code 1940, T. 14, § 415. He pled guilty. The judge rather than a jury fixed the punishment.
We were confronted with a like claim in Thomas v. State, 40 Ala.App. 697, 122 So.2d 535, a habeas corpus appeal. There we refused to consider due process had been breached in a clear case of invited error.
Here, too, we consider the judgment should be
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rickard v. State, 3 Div. 278
...a procedural error which cannot be raised in a coram nobis proceeding. Thoams v. State, 40 Ala.App. 697, 122 So.2d 535; Isbell v. State, 42 Ala.App. 498, 169 So.2d Moreover, it might be inferred that Rickard pled guilty to the lesser offense of [44 Ala.App. 283] assault with intent to rob. ......
-
Rice v. Simpson, Civ. A. No. 2583-N.
...sentence is invalid because of a claim of excessiveness if the second sentence does not go beyond the statutory limit. Isbell v. State, 42 Ala.App. 498, 169 So.2d 27. Our Supreme Court has failed to adopt any general rule that our remedy of coram nobis automatically assimilates all rights i......
-
Norris v. State, 6 Div. 213
...jury is a procedural error which cannot be raised in a coram nobis proceeding. The court foreclosed a similar claim in Isbell v. State, 42 Ala.App. 498, 169 So.2d 27 (1964). In Thomas v. State, 40 Ala.App. 697, 122 So.2d 535 (1960), the court reviewed the trial court's striking the petition......
-
Aaron v. State, 3 Div. 223
...sentence is invalid because of a claim of excessiveness if the second sentence does not go beyond the statutory limit. Isbell v. State, 42 Ala.App. 498, 169 So.2d 27. Our Supreme Court has failed to adopt any general rule that our remedy of coram nobis automatically assimilates all rights i......
-
Rickard v. State, 3 Div. 278
...a procedural error which cannot be raised in a coram nobis proceeding. Thoams v. State, 40 Ala.App. 697, 122 So.2d 535; Isbell v. State, 42 Ala.App. 498, 169 So.2d Moreover, it might be inferred that Rickard pled guilty to the lesser offense of [44 Ala.App. 283] assault with intent to rob. ......
-
Rice v. Simpson, Civ. A. No. 2583-N.
...sentence is invalid because of a claim of excessiveness if the second sentence does not go beyond the statutory limit. Isbell v. State, 42 Ala.App. 498, 169 So.2d 27. Our Supreme Court has failed to adopt any general rule that our remedy of coram nobis automatically assimilates all rights i......
-
Norris v. State, 6 Div. 213
...jury is a procedural error which cannot be raised in a coram nobis proceeding. The court foreclosed a similar claim in Isbell v. State, 42 Ala.App. 498, 169 So.2d 27 (1964). In Thomas v. State, 40 Ala.App. 697, 122 So.2d 535 (1960), the court reviewed the trial court's striking the petition......
-
Aaron v. State, 3 Div. 223
...sentence is invalid because of a claim of excessiveness if the second sentence does not go beyond the statutory limit. Isbell v. State, 42 Ala.App. 498, 169 So.2d 27. Our Supreme Court has failed to adopt any general rule that our remedy of coram nobis automatically assimilates all rights i......