Wright v. State
| Decision Date | 16 August 1977 |
| Docket Number | 1 Div. 840 |
| Citation | 349 So.2d 124 |
| Parties | Thadeus WRIGHT v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
No brief for appellant.
William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen., and Elizabeth N. Petree, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
On June 3, 1974, appellant was adjudicated a youthful offender by the Circuit Court of Baldwin County under an indictment charging forgery. He received a sentence of two years, which was suspended, and he was placed on probation for three years. On August 6, 1976, a proceeding to revoke his probation was instituted. On February 2, 1977, a probation revocation hearing was conducted wherein it was shown that appellant had been convicted on June 30, 1976, in the Circuit Court of Mobile County on six charges of forgery. At the probation revocation hearing appellant was present and represented by counsel. His probation was revoked, and he was ordered to serve the sentence imposed on him on June 3, 1974. This appeal is from the order of revocation and reinstatement of his sentence.
The evidence on the probation revocation hearing consisted of duly certified official documents showing appellant's conviction in the Circuit Court of Mobile County, documents of probation officers, the testimony of the Baldwin County probation officer, and the testimony of appellant. It was established on the hearing that appellant had a criminal record in Mobile County and had been placed on probation by the Circuit Court of Mobile County prior to his conviction on the six charges of forgery on June 30, 1976, and that sometime prior to that date such probation had been revoked by the Circuit Court of Mobile County. The evidence also shows that it was understood between the probation office in Mobile County and the probation office in Baldwin County that the probation office in Mobile County was to supervise appellant's probation cases.
On the hearing in the case under review, counsel for the probationer-appellant took the position that he was denied "a swift and speedy probation hearing" and that the delay of approximately seven months between the occurrence or occurrences that prompted the proceeding to revoke and the hearing that culminated in the revocation vitiated the order of revocation. In an opinion by Judge DeCarlo, we have recently held to the contrary:
Brantley v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 340 So.2d 901 (1976).
During the hearing there was an objection by probationer's counsel to a question asked the Baldwin County probation officer relative to the report of the Mobile...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McCoo v. State
...in Southern, advocating the need for a written statement of facts, became, following the decisions in Armstrong and Wright v. State, 349 So.2d 124 (Ala.Cr.App.1977), the precedent followed by this 707 So.2d at 297-99. See also Bauer v. State, 891 So.2d 1004 (Ala.Crim.App.2004). At oral argu......
-
Trice v. State
...in Southern, advocating the need for a written statement of facts, became, following the decisions in Armstrong and Wright v. State, 349 So.2d 124 (Ala.Cr.App.1977), the precedent followed by this ...
-
Ex parte Caffie
...(1975). " 'There is no definite criterion or measure of proof necessary to justify the revocation of one's probation.' Wright v. State, 349 So.2d 124 (Ala.Cr.App.1977). The evidence need not 'be strong enough Rice v. State, 429 So.2d 686, 687 to convince the court beyond a reasonable doubt ......
-
Sledge v. State
...will not disturb the trial court's conclusions. SeeMoore v. State, 432 So. 2d 552, 553 (Ala. Crim. App. 1983), and Wright v. State, 349 So. 2d 124, 125 (Ala. Crim. App. 1977)." Ex parte J.J.D., 778 So. 2d 240, 242 (Ala. 2000). Additionally," ‘[t]he weight of the evidence, the credibility of......