Nance v. State

453 So. 2d 761, 1984 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 5108
Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama·Decided May 8, 1984·No. 8 Div. 4·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

BOWEN, Presiding Judge.

It affirmatively appearing that the appellant’s probation was revoked and that she was not given “[a] written statement by the judge as to the evidence relied on and reasons for revoking probation”, as required by Armstrong v. State, 294 Ala. 100, 103, 312 So.2d 620 (1975), this cause is remanded with directions that the requirements and guidelines set forth in Armstrong be satisfied.

REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

All Judges concur.

ON RETURN TO REMAND

The return to remand shows that the appellant’s probation revocation was in full compliance with Armstrong, supra. Therefore, the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

OPINION EXTENDED;

AFFIRMED.

All Judges concur.

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

Nance v. State, 453 So. 2d 761, 1984 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 5108 (Ala. Ct. App. 1984).

453 So. 2d 761 (Nance v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Edmondson v. State
494 So. 2d 786 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1985)
Jett v. State
488 So. 2d 506 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1985)
Salter v. State
470 So. 2d 1360 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1985)