Chaverst v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Chaverst v. State

517 So. 2d 643, 1987 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 5568

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

DecidedNovember 10, 1987

StatusPublished

Cited by20 cases

This text of 517 So. 2d 643 (Chaverst v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chaverst v. State, 517 So. 2d 643, 1987 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 5568 (Ala. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

This is an appeal from the denial of a pro se petition for writ of error coram nobis. The appellant alleges therein that he was denied effective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to interview two witnesses whose names were given to him by the appellant. He further states that his counsel failed to appeal his conviction to this Court even after the appellant expressed his desire to appeal.

The State did not respond to the allegations of the appellant. Therefore, "the unrefuted facts set out by the petitioner must be taken as true." Ex parte Floyd,457 So.2d 961, 962 (Ala. 1984); Hall v. State, 495 So.2d 717, 718 (Ala.Cr.App. 1986). Because the petition is meritorious on its face, this case is reversed and remanded with directions that an evidentiary hearing be held. Id. at 718.

REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

All the Judges concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

This is an appeal from the denial of a pro se petition for writ of error coram nobis. The appellant alleges therein that he was denied effective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to interview two witnesses whose names were given to him by the appellant. He further states that his counsel failed to appeal his conviction to this Court even after the appellant expressed his desire to appeal.

The State did not respond to the allegations of the appellant. Therefore, "the unrefuted facts set out by the petitioner must be taken as true." Ex parte Floyd,457 So.2d 961, 962 (Ala. 1984); Hall v. State, 495 So.2d 717, 718 (Ala.Cr.App. 1986). Because the petition is meritorious on its face, this case is reversed and remanded with directions that an evidentiary hearing be held. Id. at 718.

REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

All the Judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

517 So. 2d 643, 1987 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 5568, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chaverst-v-state-alacrimapp-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack