Henderson v. State
575 So. 2d 161, 1991 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 94, 1991 WL 31241
This text of 575 So. 2d 161 (Henderson 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
Henderson v. State, 575 So. 2d 161, 1991 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 94, 1991 WL 31241 (Ala. Ct. App. 1991).
Opinion
ON RETURN TO REMAND
On remand, the circuit court entered the following order:
“Court makes the following findings of facts: On 9-5-89 Judge Pearson denied Petitioner’s Petition for Relief under Rule 20, said Petition having been filed on Aug 17, 89.
[162]*162“On Feb. 16, 1990 a successive Petition was filed & adversely ruled upon by J. Pearson on 3-7-90.
“The Feb 90 Petition is deemed a ‘successive’ petition alleging identical complaint & barred under Rule 20.2(b).
“Further, see Court’s Exhibit ‘B’ re Def’s statement of satisfaction of services rendered by court appointed atty which refutes def’s claims re ineffective assistance of counsel; further, Def. states in open court that what he wants is a ‘sentence reduction,’ see letters from Def. about his changed life, etc.”
Based on this order, the judgment of the circuit court denying the petition for post-conviction relief is affirmed.
OPINION EXTENDED; AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
575 So. 2d 161, 1991 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 94, 1991 WL 31241, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henderson-v-state-alacrimapp-1991.