Pittman v. State
| Decision Date | 08 March 1985 |
| Citation | 466 So.2d 951 |
| Parties | Ex parte STATE of Alabama. (Re: Wanda PITTMAN v. STATE.) 83-1221. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and Mary Ellen Fike Forehand, Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.
Samuel L. Adams, Dothan, for respondent.
Certiorari was granted to review the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals as it pertains to the claim of a variance between the indictment and the evidence. 460 So.2d 232 (1984).
Under the following authorities, the decision on that point was not in error: Helms v. State, 270 Ala. 603, 121 So.2d 106 (1960); Jones v. State, 241 Ala. 337, 2 So.2d 422 (1941); McCoy v. State, 232 Ala. 104, 166 So. 769 (1936); Aaron v. State, 37 Ala. 106 (1861); Perry v. State, 455 So.2d 999 (Ala.Crim.App.1984); Gilbert v. State, 410 So.2d 473 (Ala.Crim.App.1982); Huddleston v. State, 37 Ala.App. 57, 64 So.2d 90 (1952); Armstrong v. State, 24 Ala.App. 334, 134 So. 897 (1931); Messer v. State, 24 Ala.App. 360, 135 So. 415 (1931).
WRIT QUASHED AS IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED.
I agree that the writ must be quashed, but I reach this result only because current criminal procedure does not allow an indictment to be amended. Proposed Rule 13.5, Ala.R.Crim.P. (advisory committee draft, dated June 1, 1977), would have permitted the charge "to be amended, without the defendant's consent, at any time before verdict or finding if no additional or different offense is charged, and if substantial rights of the defendant are not prejudiced," but this proposed rule has not been adopted; consequently, I agree with the Court of Criminal Appeals' determination that there was a fatal variance; therefore, the writ we originally granted is due to be quashed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Edwards v. State
...having been amended 1 to conform to the proof, then the conviction will be reversed and the case remanded for a new trial. Pittman v. State, 466 So.2d 951 (Ala.1985), Ex parte Washington, 448 So.2d 404 (Ala.1984), Ex parte Hightower, 443 So.2d 1272 (Ala.1983). If, instead of continuing to a......
-
C.D.B. v. State
...female is not the standard for application in a case in which the alleged victim is a child thirteen years of age.’), writ quashed, 466 So.2d 951 (Ala.1985). ‘[T]he “totality of the circumstances” should be considered in deciding whether there was sufficient evidence of forcible compulsion.......
-
C.D.B v. State
...female is not the standard for application in a case in which the alleged victim is a child thirteen years of age.'), writ quashed, 466 So. 2d 951 (Ala. 1 985). ' [T]he "totality of the circumstances" should be considered in deciding whether there was sufficient evidence of forcible compuls......
-
Powe v. State
...Appeals' decision conflicts with that court's decisions in Pittman v. State, 460 So.2d 232 (Ala.Crim.App.1984), writ quashed, 466 So.2d 951 (Ala.1985), and Parrish v. State, 494 So.2d 705 The record in this case reveals the following pertinent facts: The alleged victim, N.S., testified that......