Williford v. State
| Decision Date | 16 December 2020 |
| Docket Number | CR-19-0481 |
| Citation | 329 So.3d 86 |
| Parties | Tiffany Dawn WILLIFORD v. STATE of Alabama |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Lisa M. Ivey of Stubbs, Sills & Frye, P.C., Anniston, for appellant.
Steve Marshall, atty. gen., and J. Thomas Leverette, asst. atty. gen, for appellee.
Tiffany Dawn Williford appeals the Marion Circuit Court's order revoking her probation. For the reasons set forth herein, we reverse the circuit court's order and remand for further proceedings.
It appears from the limited record on appeal that in 2018 Williford was convicted of unlawful possession of a controlled substance, a violation of § 13A-12-212, Ala. Code 1975, and of fourth-degree theft of property, a violation of § 13A-8-5, Ala. Code 1975. (C. 5.) It appears that Williford was sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment for her unlawful-possession-of-a-controlled-substance conviction and that her sentence was split for her to serve two months’ imprisonment, followed by five years of supervised probation. (C. 5.) As to her theft conviction, it appears that Williford was sentenced to one year of imprisonment, that her sentence was suspended, and that she was ordered to serve a two-year probationary term. (C. 5.)
In November 2019, Williford's probation officer filed a delinquency report alleging that Williford had violated the terms of her probation by absconding. Specifically, the report alleged that Williford had "never reported ... to go over the paperwork," that the probation officer had "mailed two letters to two different addresses instructing [Williford] to report in," that Williford "never reported or called" in response to those letters, that the probation officer had left "a card [at Williford's mother's address] noting for [Williford] to report in ... immediately," that Williford "never did" respond to the card, and that it was therefore "obvious that [Williford was] avoiding supervision." (C. 5.) In December 2019, Williford's probation officer supplemented the delinquency report to allege that Williford had violated the terms of her probation by being arrested and charged with two new counts of unlawful possession of a controlled substance. (C. 7.)
On January 9, 2020, Williford appeared before the circuit court for a hearing, at which the following colloquy occurred:
(R. 5-9.)
On January 21, 2020, the circuit court entered an order revoking Williford's probation and ordering her to serve the balance of her sentences; that order states, in pertinent part:
(C. 3.) Williford filed a timely notice of appeal.
On appeal, Williford contends that the circuit court's order revoking her probation must be reversed because, she says, the January 9, 2020, hearing from which we quoted above did not constitute a revocation hearing. See Hollins v. State, 737 So. 2d 1056, 1057 (Ala. Crim. App. 1998) (). In support of her contention that the January 9, 2020, hearing did not constitute a revocation hearing, Williford cites cases in which this Court held that a purported revocation hearing did not actually amount to a revocation hearing because no evidence was presented. See Allen, supra ; Saffold v. State, 77 So. 3d 178 (Ala. Crim. App. 2011) ; and D.L.B. v. State, 941 So. 2d 324 (Ala. Crim. App. 2006). See also Moore v. State, 54 So. 3d 442 (Ala. Crim. App. 2010). Thus, Williford argues, because the circuit court did not receive any evidence at the January 9, 2020, hearing, that hearing did not constitute a revocation hearing, and, as a result, she argues, the circuit court's order must be reversed and the case remanded for that court to hold an adequate revocation hearing.
In response, the State argues that Williford's claim is not preserved for appellate review because she did not raise the claim in the circuit court. Although it is true that the general rules of preservation apply to revocation proceedings, King v. State, 294 So. 3d 257, 259 (Ala. Crim. App 2019), Alabama's appellate courts have recognized exceptions to the preservation rule, including a claim " ‘that a revocation hearing actually be held.’ " King, 294 So. 3d at 259 (quoting Singleton v. State, 114 So. 3d 868, 870 (Ala. Crim. App. 2012) ). By arguing that the January 9, 2020, hearing did not constitute a revocation hearing, Williford is arguing that a revocation hearing did not occur. Thus, Williford may raise this claim for the first time on appeal. King, supra. See also Moore, 54 So. 3d at 443 ( ); and Hyche v. State, 301 So. 3d 848, 850 (Ala. Crim. App. 2020) ().
Having concluded that Williford may raise this claim for the first time on appeal, we agree with Williford's contention that a revocation hearing did not occur in this case. As noted, the State presented no evidence at the January 9, 2020, hearing, and, as Williford notes, this Court has held that a probationer was denied the right to a revocation hearing in cases in which the probationer appeared before the circuit court for a hearing but the circuit court did not receive evidence at the hearing and thus...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Wilson v. State
-
Gann v. State
...did not admit to committing a new offense. In support of his claim, Gann relies on this Court's recent decision in Williford v. State, 329 So. 3d 86 (Ala. Crim. App. 2020).3 In Williford, the appellant raised the same argument Gann raises here – that an adequate revocation hearing was not h......
-
Nelson v. State
...admitted that he had been arrested for new offenses but denied that he had committed the new offenses); and Williford v. State, 329 So. 3d 86 (Ala. Crim. App. 2020) (holding that the probationer did not admit to a violation of her probation when she admitted only that she had been arrested ......
-
Gosa v. State
... ... exception to the preservation requirement. But Gosa alleged ... that the circuit court did not hold a formal revocation ... hearing, and he reiterates that argument in his reply brief ... Gosa ... cites Williford v. State , 329 So.3d 86 ... (Ala.Crim.App.2020) and Wilkerson v. State , [Ms ... CR-20-0660, May 27, 2022] ___So. 3d. ___(Ala.Crim.App.2022), ... in support of his position. In Wilkerson , this Court ... summarized the facts of Williford : ... "[W]hile Williford ... ...