Dawson v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Dawson v. State

710 So. 2d 476, 1998 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 23, 1998 WL 32653

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

DecidedJanuary 30, 1998

DocketCR-95-1337

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 710 So. 2d 476 (Dawson 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

Dawson v. State, 710 So. 2d 476, 1998 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 23, 1998 WL 32653 (Ala. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

[477]*477 On Remand from the Alabama Supreme Court

BASCHAB, Judge.

On November 1, 1996, we remanded this ease for a new trial based on Dawson’s allegation of juror misconduct. In that original opinion, we also held that the appellant’s allegation that he was denied the right to a speedy trial was without merit. See Dawson v. State, 710 So.2d 467 (Ala.Cr.App.1996). The Alabama Supreme Court granted the State’s petition for certiorari review on the issue of juror misconduct. That court reversed our judgment on that issue, holding that, although the juror had improperly viewed the crime scene, a new trial was not warranted. It then remanded the case to this court for action consistent with its holding. Dawson v. State, 710 So.2d 472 (Ala. 1997).

We addressed the appellant’s arguments concerning the speedy trial issues in our original opinion. Our holding that the appellant’s right to a speedy trial was not violated was not affected by the supreme court’s opinion.

Therefore, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

All judges concur.

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

[477]*477 On Remand from the Alabama Supreme Court

BASCHAB, Judge.

On November 1, 1996, we remanded this ease for a new trial based on Dawson’s allegation of juror misconduct. In that original opinion, we also held that the appellant’s allegation that he was denied the right to a speedy trial was without merit. See Dawson v. State, 710 So.2d 467 (Ala.Cr.App.1996). The Alabama Supreme Court granted the State’s petition for certiorari review on the issue of juror misconduct. That court reversed our judgment on that issue, holding that, although the juror had improperly viewed the crime scene, a new trial was not warranted. It then remanded the case to this court for action consistent with its holding. Dawson v. State, 710 So.2d 472 (Ala. 1997).

We addressed the appellant’s arguments concerning the speedy trial issues in our original opinion. Our holding that the appellant’s right to a speedy trial was not violated was not affected by the supreme court’s opinion.

Therefore, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

All judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

710 So. 2d 476, 1998 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 23, 1998 WL 32653, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dawson-v-state-alacrimapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack