Jenkins v. State
Decision Date | 27 October 1987 |
Docket Number | 8 Div. 782 |
Citation | 516 So.2d 944 |
Parties | Herman JENKINS v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Dan C. Totten, of Malone & Totten, Athens, for appellant.
Don Siegelman, Atty. Gen., and Dorothy F. Norwood, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
This is an appeal from the denial of a petition for writ of habeas corpus.
In denying the petition, the circuit judge issued the following written order:
On appeal, the petitioner, through appointed counsel, argues that he was denied due process in the re-initiation of the disciplinary proceeding because the assistant warden did not communicate to the chairperson of the first disciplinary committee the reason for his disapproval of the committee's recommendation. This issue has not been preserved for review.
Our review of the record does not show that this particular issue was presented to the circuit judge. At the evidentiary hearing on the petition, Assistant Warden William S. Stricker testified that the letter to the petitioner "should have stated in there why the disciplinary was going to be reinitiated" but that he did not know whether or not "it would be said in there."
Although there was some general testimony about Department of Corrections Administrative Regulation 403, a copy of that regulation was not introduced into evidence at the hearing. The record on appeal cannot be enlarged or supplemented by an appendix to the appellant's brief, wherein a copy of the regulation is contained. Tyus v. State, 347 So.2d 1377, 1380 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Tyus, 347 So.2d 1384 (Ala.1977). Because Regulation 403 is not "of such wide application and established duration as to have become a part of the common knowledge of...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Smith v. State
...record.16 "The record on appeal cannot be enlarged or supplemented by an appendix to the appellant's brief...." Jenkins v. State, 516 So 2d 944, 945 (Ala. Crim. App. 1987), citing Tyus v. State, 347 So. 2d 1377, 1380 (Ala. Crim. App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Tyus, 347 So. 2d 1384 (Ala. 1977......
-
Smith v. State
...the record.16 “The record on appeal cannot be enlarged or supplemented by an appendix to the appellant's brief....” Jenkins v. State, 516 So.2d 944, 945 (Ala.Crim.App.1987), citing Tyus v. State, 347 So.2d 1377, 1380 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Tyus, 347 So.2d 1384 (Ala.1977).16......
-
Smith v. State
...1384 (Ala.1977). "The record on appeal cannot be enlarged or supplemented by an appendix to the appellant's brief." Jenkins v. State, 516 So.2d 944, 945 (Ala.Cr.App.1987). Even if we were to consider the transcript of the grand jury testimony when assessing the correctness of the trial cour......
-
Goree v. Shirley
...The record on appeal cannot be supplemented or enlarged by the attachment of an appendix to an appellant's brief. Jenkins v. State, 516 So.2d 944 (Ala.Crim.App.1987); see also TranSouth Financial Corp. v. Bell, 739 So.2d 1110 (Ala.1999). This court cannot discern from the record before it t......