Lockett v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Lockett v. State

644 So. 2d 34, 1994 WL 63462

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedMarch 4, 1994

Docket1930047

StatusPublished

Cited by13 cases

This text of 644 So. 2d 34 (Lockett 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.

Bluebook

Lockett v. State, 644 So. 2d 34, 1994 WL 63462 (Ala. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Aljay Lockett was convicted of theft in the Circuit Court of Montgomery County. In 1992, he petitioned that court for a writ of habeas corpus, asserting that his 1982 arrest for theft was illegal and that the Montgomery Circuit Court had had no jurisdiction to convict him. The circuit court dismissed the habeas corpus petition, finding that the issues raised could have been raised on direct appeal and that they were, therefore, not cognizable in a habeas corpus proceeding. The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the judgment and remanded the case, directing the trial court to return Lockett's petition to him so that he could file a proper Rule 32, A.R.Crim.P., petition. 644 So.2d 33. This Court granted the State's petition for a writ of certiorari in order to review that holding.

The claims raised in Lockett's petition for a writ of habeas corpus could have been raised on direct appeal; therefore, those claims are clearly precluded under Rule 32, A.R.Crim.P., and the trial court did not err in summarily dismissing the petition. Because Lockett's claims are clearly precluded under Rule 32, there is no need to remand for an opportunity to file a proper Rule 32 petition.

The judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals is reversed and this cause is remanded *Page 35 for action consistent with this opinion.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

HORNSBY, C.J., and MADDOX, ALMON, SHORES, HOUSTON and INGRAM, JJ., concur.

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

Aljay Lockett was convicted of theft in the Circuit Court of Montgomery County. In 1992, he petitioned that court for a writ of habeas corpus, asserting that his 1982 arrest for theft was illegal and that the Montgomery Circuit Court had had no jurisdiction to convict him. The circuit court dismissed the habeas corpus petition, finding that the issues raised could have been raised on direct appeal and that they were, therefore, not cognizable in a habeas corpus proceeding. The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the judgment and remanded the case, directing the trial court to return Lockett's petition to him so that he could file a proper Rule 32, A.R.Crim.P., petition. 644 So.2d 33. This Court granted the State's petition for a writ of certiorari in order to review that holding.

The claims raised in Lockett's petition for a writ of habeas corpus could have been raised on direct appeal; therefore, those claims are clearly precluded under Rule 32, A.R.Crim.P., and the trial court did not err in summarily dismissing the petition. Because Lockett's claims are clearly precluded under Rule 32, there is no need to remand for an opportunity to file a proper Rule 32 petition.

The judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals is reversed and this cause is remanded *Page 35 for action consistent with this opinion.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

HORNSBY, C.J., and MADDOX, ALMON, SHORES, HOUSTON and INGRAM, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

644 So. 2d 34, 1994 WL 63462, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lockett-v-state-ala-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack