Clay v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Clay v. State

896 So. 2d 663, 2003 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 291, 2003 WL 22463383

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

DecidedOctober 31, 2003

DocketCR-02-1528

StatusPublished

This text of 896 So. 2d 663 (Clay 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

Clay v. State, 896 So. 2d 663, 2003 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 291, 2003 WL 22463383 (Ala. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

McMILLAN, Presiding Judge.

The appellant, Louis Ben Clay, Jr., appeals from the trial court’s order denying his Rule 32, Ala. R.Crim. P., petition for postconviction relief.

Clay argues that the Lee Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction to rule upon his Rule 32 petition because he had not paid the filing fee and the court did not rule upon his request to proceed in forma pauperis.

There is no indication in the record that Clay paid the filing fee for his petition; therefore, this case must be remanded to the circuit court on the authority of Broadway v. State, 881 So.2d 1068 (Ala.Crim. App.2003). The circuit court is instructed to make written findings of fact regarding whether a filing fee was paid in this case or whether Clay was granted indigency status. If neither event has occurred, the circuit court’s order summarily dismissing Clay’s Rule 32 petition is a nullity, and this appeal is due to be dismissed. We preter-mit discussion of the issues raised in Clay’s petition, until this Court receives the circuit court’s order on return to remand. Due return shall be made to this Court within 42 days of the date of this opinion.

REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

COBB, BASCHAB, SHAW, and WISE, JJ., concur.

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

McMILLAN, Presiding Judge.

The appellant, Louis Ben Clay, Jr., appeals from the trial court’s order denying his Rule 32, Ala. R.Crim. P., petition for postconviction relief.

Clay argues that the Lee Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction to rule upon his Rule 32 petition because he had not paid the filing fee and the court did not rule upon his request to proceed in forma pauperis.

There is no indication in the record that Clay paid the filing fee for his petition; therefore, this case must be remanded to the circuit court on the authority of Broadway v. State, 881 So.2d 1068 (Ala.Crim. App.2003). The circuit court is instructed to make written findings of fact regarding whether a filing fee was paid in this case or whether Clay was granted indigency status. If neither event has occurred, the circuit court’s order summarily dismissing Clay’s Rule 32 petition is a nullity, and this appeal is due to be dismissed. We preter-mit discussion of the issues raised in Clay’s petition, until this Court receives the circuit court’s order on return to remand. Due return shall be made to this Court within 42 days of the date of this opinion.

REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

COBB, BASCHAB, SHAW, and WISE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

896 So. 2d 663, 2003 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 291, 2003 WL 22463383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clay-v-state-alacrimapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack