Noble v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Noble v. State

708 So. 2d 217, 1997 WL 522864

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

DecidedAugust 22, 1997

DocketCR-96-0982

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 708 So. 2d 217 (Noble 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

Noble v. State, 708 So. 2d 217, 1997 WL 522864 (Ala. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Brent Edward Noble appeals from the summary denial of his petition for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Rule 32, Ala. R.Crim. P. Noble pleaded guilty to, and was convicted of, burglary in the third degree. Noble attempted to appeal to this court, but the appeal was dismissed as untimely. Noble then filed a Rule 32 petition, alleging, among other things, that his counsel had failed to appeal within the prescribed time and that the failure was without fault on his part. See Rule 32.1(f.). The trial court summarily denied the petition on the State's motion; the State did not address Noble's contention concerning the failure of his trial counsel to timely appeal.

The trial court erred in denying the petition. If the failure to timely file the notice of appeal was through no fault of the appellant's, he is entitled to an out-of-time appeal. SeeStarks v. State, 662 So.2d 1214 (Ala.Cr.App. 1994), and Rule 32.1(f), Ala. R.Crim. P. The appellant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on this issue. We are remanding this case to the trial court with instructions for that court to hold a hearing; due return should be filed in this court no later than 42 days from the date of this opinion. The court should make findings of fact concerning this contention as required by Rule 32.9(d), Ala. R.Crim. P. See Cox v. City of Atmore,677 So.2d 818 (Ala.Cr.App. 1996).

REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.^*

All the Judges concur.

^* Note from the reporter of decisions: On November 14, 1997, on return to remand, the Court of Criminal Appeals dismissed the appeal, without opinion.

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

Brent Edward Noble appeals from the summary denial of his petition for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Rule 32, Ala. R.Crim. P. Noble pleaded guilty to, and was convicted of, burglary in the third degree. Noble attempted to appeal to this court, but the appeal was dismissed as untimely. Noble then filed a Rule 32 petition, alleging, among other things, that his counsel had failed to appeal within the prescribed time and that the failure was without fault on his part. See Rule 32.1(f.). The trial court summarily denied the petition on the State's motion; the State did not address Noble's contention concerning the failure of his trial counsel to timely appeal.

The trial court erred in denying the petition. If the failure to timely file the notice of appeal was through no fault of the appellant's, he is entitled to an out-of-time appeal. SeeStarks v. State, 662 So.2d 1214 (Ala.Cr.App. 1994), and Rule 32.1(f), Ala. R.Crim. P. The appellant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on this issue. We are remanding this case to the trial court with instructions for that court to hold a hearing; due return should be filed in this court no later than 42 days from the date of this opinion. The court should make findings of fact concerning this contention as required by Rule 32.9(d), Ala. R.Crim. P. See Cox v. City of Atmore,677 So.2d 818 (Ala.Cr.App. 1996).

REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.^*

All the Judges concur.

^* Note from the reporter of decisions: On November 14, 1997, on return to remand, the Court of Criminal Appeals dismissed the appeal, without opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

708 So. 2d 217, 1997 WL 522864, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/noble-v-state-alacrimapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack