Pressey v. State
| Decision Date | 17 January 1992 |
| Citation | 597 So.2d 1385 |
| Parties | Tarra Lenette PRESSEY v. STATE. CR 91-114. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Thomas M. Goggans, Montgomery, for appellant.
James H. Evans, Atty. Gen., and Beth Slate Poe, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
This is an appeal from the denial of a petition for post-conviction relief. The petitioner challenges her 1986 guilty plea conviction for the traffic violation of speeding on the ground that she was not advised of her rights under the Youthful Offender Act. At the time she pleaded guilty, the petitioner was 18 years of age.
The criminal offense of speeding is defined by Ala.Code 1975, § 32-5A-171. The offense is a misdemeanor punishable (for the first offense) by a fine of not more than $100 or by imprisonment for not more than ten days. §§ 32-5A-8(a) and (b).
Section 15-19-1(a) provides in pertinent part:
"A person charged with a crime which was committed in his minority but was not disposed of in juvenile court and which involves moral turpitude or is subject to a sentence of commitment for one year or more shall, and, if charged with a lesser crime may be investigated and examined by the court to determine whether he should be tried as a youthful offender."
We construe the underscored language to mean that a juvenile who commits a crime that does not involve moral turpitude or which involves a maximum sentence of less than one year may be, but does not have to be, investigated and examined by the court to determine whether he or she should be afforded youthful offender treatment. That option is in the discretion of the trial court and does not constitute a statutory right to which a defendant is entitled where the defendant is charged with an offense that does not involve moral turpitude or that involves a maximum sentence of less than one year.
This interpretation gives meaning to the underscored language of the statute. One of the major principles of statutory construction is that "[i]n arriving at a determination of the legislature's intent, a statute should be examined as a whole and, if possible, every section should be given effect." McCausland v. Tide-Mayflower Moving and Storage, 499 So.2d 1378, 1382 (Ala.1986). "[T]he well settled rule of construing statutes is that every word and each section thereof must be given effect, if possible, and construed with other sections in pari materia." In re Ashworth, 291 Ala. 723, 726, 287 So.2d 843, 846 (1974).
"The Youthful Offender Act applies equally to all crimes from petit...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Woods v. State
...that the Youthful Offender Act applies to all crimes ranging from "`petit larceny to murder in the first degree.'"2 Pressey v. State, 597 So.2d 1385, 1386 (Ala.Cr.App.1992), quoting Watkins v. State, 357 So.2d 156, 161 (Ala.Cr. App.1977), cert. denied, 357 So.2d 161 (Ala. Here, the trial co......
-
Adams v. State
...was still eligible for treatment under the YOA. The YOA applies to all crimes, no matter how severe the charge. See Pressey v. State, 597 So.2d 1385 (Ala.Crim.App.1992). The record reflects that during Adams's arraignment he was advised of his right to request treatment under the YOA. The f......
-
Siebert v. Haley
...Reed v. State, 649 So.2d 1303 (Ala.Crim.App.1994); Winstid v. State, 654 So.2d 47 (Ala.Crim.App.1993); Pressey v. State, 597 So.2d 1385 (Ala.Crim. App.1992). These cases demonstrate that the statute of limitations has been applied in collateral proceedings. Although most of the cases do not......
-
Copenhaver v. State Dept. of Public Safety
... ... Pressey v ... State, 597 So.2d 1385 (Ala.Crim.App.1992); see also § 12-15-1(8), Ala.Code 1975 ... Alabama's Youthful Offender Act provides: ... "No determination made under the provisions of this chapter shall disqualify any youth for public office or public ... ...