Hinton v. State

668 So. 2d 49, 1994 Ala. LEXIS 268, 1994 WL 154645

Opinion

This Court granted the State's petition for a writ of certiorari to review the same legal question presented inCantu v. State, 660 So.2d 1026 (Ala. 1994), and in Parish v.State, 660 So.2d 231 (Ala. 1994): If a trial judge fails to advise a defendant of the maximum and minimum sentence he or she could receive if he or she pleaded guilty, is the sentence given by the trial judge void? In Cantu and in Parish, this Court held that the sentence was not void. We reach the same result in this case. Consequently, the holding by the Court of Criminal Appeals to the contrary, 668 So.2d 48, is reversed and the cause is remanded to that Court for further proceedings. See Cantu and Parish.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

HORNSBY, C.J., and SHORES, HOUSTON, STEAGALL, KENNEDY, INGRAM, and COOK, JJ., concur.