Inabinett v. State
This text of 594 So. 2d 214 (Inabinett v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Ex parte State of Alabama.
(Re Don Keith INABINETT and William Alvin Atwell v. STATE).
Supreme Court of Alabama.
James H. Evans, Atty. Gen., and Joseph G.L. Marston III, Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.
Thomas M. Haas and N. Ruth Haas and Delano J. Palughi, Mobile, for respondent.
Prior report: Ala.Cr.App., 594 So.2d 202.
PER CURIAM.
WRIT DENIED.
HORNSBY, C.J., and ALMON, SHORES, ADAMS and INGRAM, JJ., concur.
MADDOX, HOUSTON and STEAGALL, JJ., dissent.
MADDOX, Justice (dissenting).
I would issue the writ to review the State's claim that the totality of the circumstances justified the seizure in this case.
After a review, I might agree with the opinion of the Court of Criminal Appeals, 594 So.2d 202 (1992), but I cannot agree to deny certiorari review.
HOUSTON and STEAGALL, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
594 So. 2d 214, 1992 WL 27897, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/inabinett-v-state-ala-1992.