Hughley v. State

451 So. 2d 439
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama
DecidedMay 22, 1984
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 451 So. 2d 439 (Hughley 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
Hughley v. State, 451 So. 2d 439 (Ala. Ct. App. 1984).

Opinion

Willie James Hughley was indicted for the intentional killing of his wife, Mary Etta Aaron Hughley, in violation of §13A-6-2. Hughley was found guilty of murder by the jury, and the trial judge set sentence at life imprisonment in the penitentiary.

We pretermit a statement of the evidence because of error which occurred during the trial court's oral charge.

I
The following portion of the record is taken from the trial court's oral charge to the jury. *Page 440
"I would further charge you, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, that a person commits the crime of Murder if he causes the death of another person and in performing the act or acts which causes the death of the person, he intends to kill that person; or: if, under the circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life, he recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death to a person other than himself, and thereby causes the death of another person." (R. 85).

Defense counsel objected to this charge on "reckless murder" because the indictment charged "intentional murder". We must reverse this case on the grounds set out in Ex ParteWashington, [1984] 448 So.2d 404 (Ala. 1984). In that opinion, the Alabama Supreme Court held that an accused has a right to be informed of the charges against him, and that it is error for the trial judge to charge on "reckless murder" unless the indictment specifically contains a "reckless murder" charge. See also Dawson v. State [1984] 449 So.2d 800 (Ala.Cr.App. 1984).

Therefore, for the reasons shown, this cause is due to be reversed and remanded for a new trial.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All the Judges concur.

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

Related

Kuk v. State
602 So. 2d 1213 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1992)
Biddie v. State
516 So. 2d 837 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1987)
Marsh v. State
461 So. 2d 51 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1984)
Ponder v. State
451 So. 2d 1382 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
451 So. 2d 439, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hughley-v-state-alacrimapp-1984.