Miller v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Miller v. State

628 So. 2d 1021, 1993 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 1014, 1993 WL 304509

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

DecidedAugust 13, 1993

DocketCR-91-1083

StatusPublished

This text of 628 So. 2d 1021 (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, 628 So. 2d 1021, 1993 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 1014, 1993 WL 304509 (Ala. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

ON RETURN TO REMAND

PATTERSON, Judge.

On August 21,1992, we remanded this case to the trial court with instructions for the trial court to file a written statement of the reasons for and the evidence relied upon in its order revoking the probationary period of the appellant’s split sentence and ordering him to serve his original sentence. 611 So.2d 434. The trial court has complied with our instructions and has filed a return with this court, stating its reasons for revoking the appellant’s probation and the evidence relied upon in doing so. Thus, the judgment of the trial court revoking the probationary portion of the appellant’s split sentence and ordering that the original 10-year sentence be put into effect is due to be, and it is hereby, affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

All Judges concur.

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

ON RETURN TO REMAND

PATTERSON, Judge.

On August 21,1992, we remanded this case to the trial court with instructions for the trial court to file a written statement of the reasons for and the evidence relied upon in its order revoking the probationary period of the appellant’s split sentence and ordering him to serve his original sentence. 611 So.2d 434. The trial court has complied with our instructions and has filed a return with this court, stating its reasons for revoking the appellant’s probation and the evidence relied upon in doing so. Thus, the judgment of the trial court revoking the probationary portion of the appellant’s split sentence and ordering that the original 10-year sentence be put into effect is due to be, and it is hereby, affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

All Judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

628 So. 2d 1021, 1993 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 1014, 1993 WL 304509, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-state-alacrimapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack