Dulaney v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Dulaney v. State

321 So. 2d 719, 295 Ala. 400, 1975 Ala. LEXIS 1398

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedNovember 13, 1975

DocketSC 1498

StatusPublished

This text of 321 So. 2d 719 (Dulaney v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dulaney v. State, 321 So. 2d 719, 295 Ala. 400, 1975 Ala. LEXIS 1398 (Ala. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

BLOODWORTH, Justice.

Petition of R. D. Dulaney for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals to review and revise judgment and decision of that court in Dulaney v. State, 56 Ala.App. 374, 321 So.2d 713 (1975), is denied.

By denying the writ, we point out that writs of certiorari are frequently denied without any consideration on the merits. Haden v. Olan Mills, Inc., 273 Ala. 129, 135 So.2d 388 (1961). A denial of certiorari should never be considered on the merits of the controversy. See Hamilton Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Brothers, 240 U.S. 251, 36 S.Ct. 269, 60 L.Ed. 629 (1916). Furthermore, our denial of the writ should not be understood as approving or disapproving the language used, or the statements of law contained in the opinion of the Court of Criminal Appeals. See Cooper v. State, 287 Ala. 728, 252 So.2d 108 (1971).

Writ denied.

HEFLIN, C. J., and FAULKNER, AL-MON and EMBRY, JJ., concur.

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

BLOODWORTH, Justice.

Petition of R. D. Dulaney for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals to review and revise judgment and decision of that court in Dulaney v. State, 56 Ala.App. 374, 321 So.2d 713 (1975), is denied.

By denying the writ, we point out that writs of certiorari are frequently denied without any consideration on the merits. Haden v. Olan Mills, Inc., 273 Ala. 129, 135 So.2d 388 (1961). A denial of certiorari should never be considered on the merits of the controversy. See Hamilton Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Brothers, 240 U.S. 251, 36 S.Ct. 269, 60 L.Ed. 629 (1916). Furthermore, our denial of the writ should not be understood as approving or disapproving the language used, or the statements of law contained in the opinion of the Court of Criminal Appeals. See Cooper v. State, 287 Ala. 728, 252 So.2d 108 (1971).

Writ denied.

HEFLIN, C. J., and FAULKNER, AL-MON and EMBRY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

321 So. 2d 719, 295 Ala. 400, 1975 Ala. LEXIS 1398, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dulaney-v-state-ala-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack