Dubose v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Dubose v. State

615 So. 2d 1320, 1993 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 177, 1993 WL 35110

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

DecidedFebruary 12, 1993

DocketCR-91-1979

StatusPublished

This text of 615 So. 2d 1320 (Dubose 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

Dubose v. State, 615 So. 2d 1320, 1993 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 177, 1993 WL 35110 (Ala. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

MONTIEL, Judge.

Derrick O’Neal Dubose filed a petition styled as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. While the trial court properly treated the petition as a post-conviction proceeding under Rule 32, A.R.Cr.P., it did not give the appellant the opportunity to file a petition in the form required by 32.-6(a), A.R.Crim.P. Therefore, this case is remanded to the Lee Circuit Court with [1321]*1321directions that the appellant’s petition be returned to him so that he can have the opportunity to file a proper Rule 32 petition as required by Rule 32.6, A.R.Crim.P. Drayton v. State, 600 So.2d 1088 (Ala.Crim.App.1992); Nickerson v. State, 597 So.2d 762 (Ala.Crim.App.1992).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All Judges concur.

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

MONTIEL, Judge.

Derrick O’Neal Dubose filed a petition styled as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. While the trial court properly treated the petition as a post-conviction proceeding under Rule 32, A.R.Cr.P., it did not give the appellant the opportunity to file a petition in the form required by 32.-6(a), A.R.Crim.P. Therefore, this case is remanded to the Lee Circuit Court with [1321]*1321directions that the appellant’s petition be returned to him so that he can have the opportunity to file a proper Rule 32 petition as required by Rule 32.6, A.R.Crim.P. Drayton v. State, 600 So.2d 1088 (Ala.Crim.App.1992); Nickerson v. State, 597 So.2d 762 (Ala.Crim.App.1992).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All Judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

615 So. 2d 1320, 1993 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 177, 1993 WL 35110, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dubose-v-state-alacrimapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack