Smith v. State, 2 Div. 348
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
| Writing for the Court | BOWEN |
| Citation | 435 So.2d 158 |
| Parties | Gary Wayne SMITH v. STATE. |
| Docket Number | 2 Div. 348 |
| Decision Date | 29 March 1983 |
Page 158
v.
STATE.
Rehearing Denied May 31, 1983.
Certiorari Denied July 29, 1983
Alabama Supreme Court 82-854.
J.L. Chestnut, Jr. of Chestnut, Sanders, Sanders & Turner, Selma, for appellant.
Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and Martha Gail Ingram, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
BOWEN, Judge.
This is an appeal from a conviction for driving while under the influence of alcohol. That conviction must be reversed because the information is void.
The information charged that the defendant "did commit the offense of Driving Under the Influence in violation of Section 32-5A-191 of the Code of Alabama." The information is fatally defective because it does not specify whether the defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol (Section 32-5A-191(a)(2), under the influence of a controlled substance (Section 32-5A-191(a)(3), or under the combined influence of alcohol and a controlled substance (Section 32-5A-191(a)(4). The information did not allege a criminal offense in that it failed to describe any offense condemned by Section 32-5A-191. People v. Sinsi, 57 Ill.App.3d 716, 15 Ill.Dec. 378, 373 N.E.2d 724 (1978); People v. Tucker, 131 Ill.App.2d 598, 268 N.E.2d 191 (1971); People v. Stringfield, 37 Ill.App.2d 344, 185 N.E.2d 381 (1962). See also Barbee v. State, 417 So.2d 611 (Ala.Cr.App.1982).
The judgment of the circuit court is reversed and the cause remanded.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
DeCARLO, P.J., and TYSON and HARRIS, JJ., concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Boyle v. State, CR-09-0822
...and intent.... This is 'another of the primary exceptions to the general rule excluding evidence of other crimes.'" Phelps v. State, 435 So. 2d 158, 163 (Ala. Cr. App. 1983) (citations omitted). See also Baker v. State, 441 So. 2d 1061, 1062 (Ala. Cr. App. 1983).'"Eslava v. State, 473 So. 2......
-
Boyle v. State, CR–09–0822.
...and intent.... This is ‘another of the primary exceptions to the general rule excluding evidence of other crimes.’ ” Phelps v. State, 435 So.2d 158, 163 (Ala.Cr.App.1983) (citations omitted). See also Baker v. State, 441 So.2d 1061, 1062 (Ala.Cr.App.1983).'“Eslava v. State, 473 So.2d 1143, ......
-
Kinder v. State, 6 Div. 633
...a lesser offense. Perry v. State, 455 So.2d 999, 1002 (Ala.Cr.App.1984); Daly v. State, 442 So.2d 143 (Ala.Cr.App.1983); Phelps v. State, 435 So.2d 158 (Ala.Cr.App.1983); Gwin v. State, 425 So.2d 500 (Ala.Cr.App.1982), writ quashed, 425 So.2d 510 (Ala.1983). "Furthermore, a trial judge may ......
-
Young v. City of Hokes Bluff, CR-90-1559
...left to inference or aided by intendment." Corum v. City of Huntsville, 491 So.2d 1091, 1092 (Ala.Cr.App.1986). See also Smith v. State, 435 So.2d 158 (Ala.Cr.App.1983) (information that accused Page 412 "did commit the offense of Driving Under the Influence in violation of Section 32-5A-19......
-
Boyle v. State, CR-09-0822
...and intent.... This is 'another of the primary exceptions to the general rule excluding evidence of other crimes.'" Phelps v. State, 435 So. 2d 158, 163 (Ala. Cr. App. 1983) (citations omitted). See also Baker v. State, 441 So. 2d 1061, 1062 (Ala. Cr. App. 1983).'"Eslava v. State, 473 So. 2......
-
Boyle v. State, CR–09–0822.
...and intent.... This is ‘another of the primary exceptions to the general rule excluding evidence of other crimes.’ ” Phelps v. State, 435 So.2d 158, 163 (Ala.Cr.App.1983) (citations omitted). See also Baker v. State, 441 So.2d 1061, 1062 (Ala.Cr.App.1983).'“Eslava v. State, 473 So.2d 1143, ......
-
Kinder v. State, 6 Div. 633
...a lesser offense. Perry v. State, 455 So.2d 999, 1002 (Ala.Cr.App.1984); Daly v. State, 442 So.2d 143 (Ala.Cr.App.1983); Phelps v. State, 435 So.2d 158 (Ala.Cr.App.1983); Gwin v. State, 425 So.2d 500 (Ala.Cr.App.1982), writ quashed, 425 So.2d 510 (Ala.1983). "Furthermore, a trial judge may ......
-
Young v. City of Hokes Bluff, CR-90-1559
...left to inference or aided by intendment." Corum v. City of Huntsville, 491 So.2d 1091, 1092 (Ala.Cr.App.1986). See also Smith v. State, 435 So.2d 158 (Ala.Cr.App.1983) (information that accused Page 412 "did commit the offense of Driving Under the Influence in violation of Section 32-5A-19......