State v. Stallworth
Decision Date | 23 April 2021 |
Docket Number | CR-19-0546 |
Citation | 337 So.3d 1201 |
Parties | STATE of Alabama v. Jarron Lekell STALLWORTH |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Steve Marshall, att'y gen., and Michael Nunnelley, asst. att'y gen., for appellant.
Bruce Maddox, Montgomery, for appellee.
The State of Alabama appeals the decision of the Dallas Circuit Court dismissing the indictment charging Jarron Lekell Stallworth with one count of first-degree burglary, see of § 13A-7-5(a)(2), Ala. Code 1975, and one count of first-degree assault, see of § 13A-6-20, Ala. Code 1975.
On April 20, 2019, the Dallas County grand jury indicted Stallworth for one count of first-degree burglary and one count of first-degree assault. The indictment reads as follows:
(C. 6.)
On January 9, 2020, Stallworth filed a motion to dismiss the indictment. Stallworth alleged the following in his motion to dismiss:
(C. 90.) In support of his motion to dismiss the indictment, Stallworth also attached an affidavit from Erica Rodgers, the alleged victim, in which Rodgers stated that she did not wish to pursue the matter against Stallworth and claimed that the facts presented by Stallworth in his motion to dismiss were the true statements of what had happened during the incident.
On January 13, 2020, the circuit court filed an order, stating:
(C. 94.)
The State filed its objection to Stallworth's motion to dismiss on January 29, 2020. In its objection, the State argued: "The Court does not have the authority to grant the defendant's motion at this time." (C. 97.) The State requested that the case remain set for trial.
On February 4, 2020, the court entered an order setting a trial date for March 2, 2020.
On March 2, 2020, the circuit court entered the following order:
"THIS MATTER CAME BEFORE THE COURT FOR A PRE-TRIAL HEARING AND PURSUANT TO THE STATE'S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDER ISSUED BY ACTING CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE ROBERT BRYANT ON JANUARY 13, 2020, THIS CASE IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE."
(C. 99);(capitalization in original.)
On March 6, 2020, pursuant to Rule 15.7, Ala. R. Crim. P., the State filed a notice of appeal from the circuit court's order dismissing the indictment against Stallworth, claiming that the court lacked the authority to dismiss the indictment.
On appeal, the State reasserts its claim that the circuit court lacked the authority to dismiss the indictment against Stallworth. Specifically, the State contends that the court's order granting Stallworth's motion to dismiss constituted a "pretrial determination of the sufficiency of the evidence, which falls outside of the grounds for pretrial dismissal of an indictment permitted by the Alabama Rule of Criminal Procedure and Alabama caselaw" and that the State did not invite the circuit court's error. (State's brief, at 7.) Stallworth argues that the State's appeal was untimely and that, even if the State's appeal was timely, the circuit court's dismissal of the indictment against him was proper.
As an initial matter, Stallworth contends that this appeal is due to be dismissed because, he says, the State's notice of appeal was untimely. Specifically, he claims that, because the circuit court's January 13, 2020, order stated that "[t]he State, if it objects, shall file a response within (7) days, or the motion shall be deemed GRANTED," the indictment should have been considered dismissed on January 20, 2020. Thus, Stallworth maintains, the State's appeal, which was not filed until March 6, 2020, was untimely. We disagree.
First, we question whether a circuit court has the authority to issue a conditional order purporting to render an automatic ruling if certain conditions are or are not met without requiring the court to take further action. However, even assuming, without deciding, that the circuit court had the authority to issue such a conditional order, the record indicates that was not the circuit court's intention in the present case. Although the State's objection to Stallworth's motion to dismiss was not filed within the seven-day time period set forth in the circuit court's January 13 order, the record indicates that on February 4, 2020, the court held an arraignment, accepted Stallworth's not-guilty plea, and entered an order setting trial for March 2, 2020. See (C. 98.) The court then issued a final order dismissing the indictment against Stallworth on March 2, 2020. Because the record indicates that the court's intention was not an automatic dismissal based on the State's lack of action within a certain time, and because the court's final dismissal was not entered until March 2, 2020, the State's March 6, 2020, notice of appeal was timely. See Rule 15.7(b), Ala. R. Crim. P.
We turn now to the State's claim that the circuit court lacked the authority to dismiss the indictment against Stallworth. The State maintains that the court's dismissal constituted a "pretrial determination of the sufficiency of the evidence, which falls outside of the grounds for pretrial dismissal of an indictment permitted by the Alabama Rules of Criminal Procedure and Alabama caselaw" and that the State did not invite the circuit court's error.
This Court has previously considered the court's authority to dismiss an indictment against a defendant, stating:
State v. Walker, 192 So. 3d 426, 428 (Ala. Crim. App. 2015). This Court has also held:
State v. Bethel, 55 So. 3d 377, 379 (Ala. Crim. App. 2010).
Additionally, in Ex parte Worley, 102 So. 3d 428, 429 (Ala. 2010), the Alabama Supreme Court considered a case in which the trial court granted a defendant's motion to dismiss an indictment based on the trial court's conclusion that the State's evidence was...
To continue reading
Request your trial