Gerbige v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Gerbige v. State

571 So. 2d 401, 1990 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 1680, 1990 WL 212394

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama·Decided October 12, 1990·No. 8 Div. 429·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

AFTER REMAND FROM THE ALABAMA SUPREME COURT

McMILLAN, Judge.

Pursuant to Harris v. Reed, 489 U.S. 255 (1989), we hold that the appellant’s claim that the State failed to produce sufficient evidence to sustain his conviction of receiving stolen property in the first degree is precluded under Temp. Rule 20.2(a)(3) and (5), A.R.Cr.P. Appellant’s claim that his appellate counsel was ineffective because of a failure to file a brief on direct appeal is without merit, Ex parte Dunn, 514 So.2d 1300 (Ala.1987), because the appellant consented to his attorney’s not filing a brief.

AFFIRMED.

All the Judges concur.

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

AFTER REMAND FROM THE ALABAMA SUPREME COURT

McMILLAN, Judge.

Pursuant to Harris v. Reed, 489 U.S. 255 (1989), we hold that the appellant’s claim that the State failed to produce sufficient evidence to sustain his conviction of receiving stolen property in the first degree is precluded under Temp. Rule 20.2(a)(3) and (5), A.R.Cr.P. Appellant’s claim that his appellate counsel was ineffective because of a failure to file a brief on direct appeal is without merit, Ex parte Dunn, 514 So.2d 1300 (Ala.1987), because the appellant consented to his attorney’s not filing a brief.

AFFIRMED.

All the Judges concur.

Gerbige v. State, 571 So. 2d 401, 1990 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 1680, 1990 WL 212394 (Ala. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

571 So. 2d 401 (Gerbige v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related