Miller v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Miller v. State

462 So. 2d 1012, 1984 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 5629

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

DecidedOctober 9, 1984

Docket5 Div. 928

StatusPublished

This text of 462 So. 2d 1012 (Miller 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

Miller v. State, 462 So. 2d 1012, 1984 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 5629 (Ala. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

BOWEN, Presiding Judge.

Petitioner filed a petition for writ of ha-beas corpus in Elmore County alleging that the clerk of the Circuit Court of Choctaw County failed to provide him or his appointed counsel with the certificate of completion and transmittal of the record on appeal of his conviction for trafficking and a copy of the trial transcript. The State’s motion to dismiss was granted and from that ruling the petitioner appeals to this Court.

For habeas corpus to apply, the judgment under which the convicted person is held must be void on its face. Sneed v. State, 157 Ala. 8, 47 So. 1028 (1908). “Habeas corpus issues against void, and not merely voidable, judgments. * * * While habeas corpus will issue when the record shows an excess or a lack of jurisdiction on the part of the convicting court, ... an allegation of errors and irregularities in the conduct of the trial will not be considered.” Fields v. State, 407 So.2d 186, 187 (Ala.Cr.App.1981). The issue of the alleged failure of a circuit court to provide an appellant with a trial transcript is not cognizable in a petition for writ of habeas corpus. James v. State, 399 So.2d 904, 906 (Ala.Cr.App.1981). Allegations of errors or irregularities involving the appeal of a judgment which is not void on its face are properly raised in a petition for writ of error coram nobis. Longmire v. State, 443 So.2d 1265 (Ala.1982); Peterson v. State, 428 So.2d 201 (Ala.Cr.App.1983).

The petition was properly dismissed and the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

All Judges concur.

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

BOWEN, Presiding Judge.

Petitioner filed a petition for writ of ha-beas corpus in Elmore County alleging that the clerk of the Circuit Court of Choctaw County failed to provide him or his appointed counsel with the certificate of completion and transmittal of the record on appeal of his conviction for trafficking and a copy of the trial transcript. The State’s motion to dismiss was granted and from that ruling the petitioner appeals to this Court.

For habeas corpus to apply, the judgment under which the convicted person is held must be void on its face. Sneed v. State, 157 Ala. 8, 47 So. 1028 (1908). “Habeas corpus issues against void, and not merely voidable, judgments. * * * While habeas corpus will issue when the record shows an excess or a lack of jurisdiction on the part of the convicting court, ... an allegation of errors and irregularities in the conduct of the trial will not be considered.” Fields v. State, 407 So.2d 186, 187 (Ala.Cr.App.1981). The issue of the alleged failure of a circuit court to provide an appellant with a trial transcript is not cognizable in a petition for writ of habeas corpus. James v. State, 399 So.2d 904, 906 (Ala.Cr.App.1981). Allegations of errors or irregularities involving the appeal of a judgment which is not void on its face are properly raised in a petition for writ of error coram nobis. Longmire v. State, 443 So.2d 1265 (Ala.1982); Peterson v. State, 428 So.2d 201 (Ala.Cr.App.1983).

The petition was properly dismissed and the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

All Judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

462 So. 2d 1012, 1984 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 5629, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-state-alacrimapp-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack