Graham v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Graham v. State

599 So. 2d 82, 1992 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 185, 1992 WL 92543

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

DecidedMarch 13, 1992

DocketCR 91-125

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 599 So. 2d 82 (Graham 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

Graham v. State, 599 So. 2d 82, 1992 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 185, 1992 WL 92543 (Ala. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

This is an appeal from the denial of a petition for writ of habeas corpus. The motion of the Attorney General to reverse and remand this cause is granted. The petition challenging the alleged unconstitutional application of the Habitual Felony Offender Act should have been treated as a petition for post-conviction relief and transferred to the court of original conviction. See Rules 32.1(a), 32.4, 32.5, and 32.6, A.R.Crim.P. See also Goodson v. State, 588 So.2d 937 (Ala.Cr.App. 1991); Salter v. State, 594 So.2d 249 (Ala.Cr.App. 1992).

The judgment of the circuit court dismissing the petition for writ of habeas corpus is reversed. This cause is remanded with directions that the petition be treated as a petition for post-conviction relief, that the petition be returned to the petitioner so that he may have the opportunity to amend to comply with the proper form of the petition as required by Rule 32.6(a), and that this cause be transferred to the court *Page 83 where the conviction occurred as required by Rule 32.5.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All Judges concur.

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

This is an appeal from the denial of a petition for writ of habeas corpus. The motion of the Attorney General to reverse and remand this cause is granted. The petition challenging the alleged unconstitutional application of the Habitual Felony Offender Act should have been treated as a petition for post-conviction relief and transferred to the court of original conviction. See Rules 32.1(a), 32.4, 32.5, and 32.6, A.R.Crim.P. See also Goodson v. State, 588 So.2d 937 (Ala.Cr.App. 1991); Salter v. State, 594 So.2d 249 (Ala.Cr.App. 1992).

The judgment of the circuit court dismissing the petition for writ of habeas corpus is reversed. This cause is remanded with directions that the petition be treated as a petition for post-conviction relief, that the petition be returned to the petitioner so that he may have the opportunity to amend to comply with the proper form of the petition as required by Rule 32.6(a), and that this cause be transferred to the court *Page 83 where the conviction occurred as required by Rule 32.5.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All Judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

599 So. 2d 82, 1992 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 185, 1992 WL 92543, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/graham-v-state-alacrimapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack