Robey v. State, CR-05-1346.
Decision Date | 25 August 2006 |
Docket Number | CR-05-1346. |
Citation | 950 So.2d 1235 |
Parties | William Keith ROBEY v. STATE of Alabama. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
William Keith Robey, pro se.
Troy King, atty. gen., and Stephen N. Dodd, asst. atty. gen., for appellee.
William Keith Robey appeals the circuit court's summary denial of his Rule 32, Ala.R.Crim.P., petition for postconviction relief, in which he attacked his January 22, 1991, conviction, entered pursuant to a guilty plea, for unlawful possession of a controlled substance and his resulting sentence of one year and one day in prison. Robey stated in his petition that he did not appeal.
Robey filed his Rule 32 petition on January 12, 2006. In his petition, Robey alleged that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to accept his plea because, he said, the trial court never informed him of his right to appeal or of his right to have counsel appointed to represent him on appeal if he was determined to be indigent.1 See Rule 26.9(b)(4), Ala.R.Crim.P.2 After receiving a response from the State, the circuit court summarily denied Robey's petition on March 31, 2006.
On appeal, Robey contends that the circuit court erred in summarily denying his petition without conducting an evidentiary hearing because, he says, his claim is jurisdictional, meritorious on its face, and was unrefuted by the State. In support of his argument, Robey cites to Lancaster v. State, 638 So.2d 1370 (Ala.Crim.App.1993). In Lancaster, the appellant filed a Rule 32 petition alleging, among other things, that he was sentenced in absentia without being afforded allocution, Rule 26.9(b)(1), Ala.R.Crim.P., and without being notified of his right to appeal, Rule 26.9(b)(4), Ala.R.Crim.P., and that he was not appointed counsel to represent him on appeal after he was found to be indigent, Rule 26.10, Ala.R.Crim.P. The circuit court summarily denied the petition, but this Court remanded for an evidentiary hearing, holding:
638 So.2d at 1373 (emphasis added).
Lancaster has already been overruled to the extent that it held that the failure to afford a defendant allocution before sentencing is a jurisdictional defect. See Shaw v. State, 949 So.2d 184 (Ala. Crim.App.2006) (). The additional holding in Lancaster — that the failure to comply with Rule 26.9(b)(4), Ala.R.Crim.P., is a jurisdictional defect — is inconsistent with numerous cases in which this Court has recognized that a trial court's failure to comply with Rule 26.9(b)(4), Ala.R.Crim.P., and to inform a defendant of his or her right to appeal a guilty-plea conviction can be harmless error. See Tanner v. State, 624 So.2d 703, 706 (Ala.Crim.App.1993) () ; Pardue v. State, 566 So.2d 502 (Ala.Crim.App.1990) (same); and Stephenson v. State, 469 So.2d 1355 (Ala. Crim.App.1985) (same). Jurisdictional defects are not subject to a harmless-error analysis. See, e.g., Tucker v. State, 833 So.2d 668, 669 (Ala.Crim.App.2001) (), quoting Poole v. State, 846 So.2d 370, 387 (Ala.Crim.App. 2001). See also Ash v. State, 843 So.2d 213, 219 (Ala.2002) (Brown, J., concurring in the result, joined by Houston, J.) (), overruled on other grounds by Ex parte Seymour, 946 So.2d 536 (Ala.2006). As we have already held with respect to the failure to afford allocution under Rule 26.9(b)(1), Ala.R.Crim.P., we now hold that the failure of a trial...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Burgess v. State
... ... Lancaster v. State , 638 So.2d 1370, 1373 ... (Ala.Crim.App.1993)[, overruled on other grounds by Robey ... v. State , 950 So.2d 1235 (Ala.Crim.App.2006)]. It is the ... allegation of facts in pleading which, if true, entitle a ... ...
-
Banks v. State
...appointed on appeal if he or she is indigent is not a defect that impacts the jurisdiction of the trial court."Robey v. State, 950 So.2d 1235, 1237 (Ala.Crim.App.2006). In Shaw v. State, 949 So.2d 184 (Ala.Crim.App.2006), this Court held that, on collateral review, "[a] claim that a defenda......
-
Largin v. State
... ... State , 638 ... So.2d 1370, 1373 (Ala.Crim.App.1993)[, overruled on other ... grounds by Robey v. State , 950 So.2d 1235 ... (Ala.Crim.App.2006)]. It is the allegation of facts in ... pleading which, if true, entitle a petitioner to ... ...
-
Green v. State
...not afforded the opportunity to address the court before the sentence is imposed is not a jurisdictional claim.”). Robey v. State, 950 So.2d 1235, 1236 (Ala.Crim.App.2006).When he pleaded guilty, Green did not reserve or preserve any issues for appeal. Further, in his postjudgment motion, G......