Jackson v. State
Decision Date | 25 October 2002 |
Parties | Darnell Falenda JACKSON v. STATE of Alabama. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Darnell Falenda Jackson, pro se.
William H. Pryor, Jr., atty. gen., and Daniel W. Madison, asst. atty. gen., for appellee.
On June 14, 2000, pursuant to a negotiated agreement, the appellant, Darnell Falenda Jackson, pled guilty to unlawful distribution of a controlled substance. He alleges that, on November 11, 2000, the trial court sentenced him to serve a term of six years in prison and that it enhanced his sentence by five years because the sale occurred within three miles of a school and an additional five years because the sale occurred within three miles of a public housing project. See §§ 13A-12-250 and 13A-12-270, Ala.Code 1975. He did not appeal his conviction. On May 7, 2002, the appellant filed a Rule 32 petition, challenging his conviction. Without requiring a response from the State, the circuit court summarily dismissed the petition. This appeal followed.
Goldsmith, 709 So.2d at 1352-53 (footnote omitted).
Subsequently, in Ex parte St. John, 805 So.2d 684, 685-86 (Ala.2001), the Alabama Supreme Court stated:
Finally, in Ex parte McWilliams, 812 So.2d 318 (Ala.2001), McWilliams filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus and an "Affidavit of Substantial Hardship" in the Escambia Circuit Court. The circuit court entered an order denying the petition, and McWilliams appealed the circuit court's judgment to this court. We dismissed McWilliams' appeal on the ground that the circuit court's order denying the petition was void because the circuit court had not ruled on McWilliams' request to proceed in forma pauperis or required McWilliams to pay the filing fee.2 Subsequently, we entered an order taxing the docket fee for the appeal to McWilliams. McWilliams filed a petition for a writ of mandamus with this court, requesting that we set aside our order taxing the docket fee to him. We denied the petition. McWilliams then filed in the Alabama Supreme Court a petition for a writ of mandamus directing this court to set aside its order taxing him with the docket fee. In its decision, the supreme court addressed the propriety of our previous decision dismissing McWilliams' appeal and stated:
To continue reading
Request your trial- Spivey v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr., Case No. 8:08-cv-2235-T-23EAJ
- Spivey v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr., Case No. 8:08-cv-2356-T-23EAJ
-
Madden v. State
...appellant paid the required filing fee and whether it actually granted his request to proceed in forma pauperis." Jackson v. State, 854 So.2d 157, 159 (Ala.Crim.App.2002) (footnotes Thus, on the authority of Jackson, we remand this cause to the circuit court for it to "make specific, writte......
-
Baker v. State
...appellant paid the required filing fee and whether it actually granted his request to proceed in forma pauperis." Jackson v. State, 854 So.2d 157, 159 (Ala.Crim.App.2002) (footnotes Thus, on the authority of Jackson, we remand this cause to the circuit court for it to "make specific, writte......