Pride v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Pride v. State

317 So. 2d 541, 55 Ala. App. 575, 1974 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 1041

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

DecidedOctober 1, 1974

Docket8 Div. 537

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 317 So. 2d 541 (Pride 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

Pride v. State, 317 So. 2d 541, 55 Ala. App. 575, 1974 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 1041 (Ala. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

DeCARLO, Judge.

On March 25, 1974, Larry Pride, an eighteen year old, entered a plea of guilty to robbery, then applied for probation. At the time his plea was taken, his constitutional rights, as outlined in Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274, were explained to him. It does not appear, however, that at any time prior to the taking of the plea he was ever informed of his right to request youthful offender status. Counsel for appellant contends that the court erred in accepting defendant’s guilty plea without ascertaining whether he had knowledge of this right to request to be considered a youthful offender.

We are of the opinion that the cause must be remanded to the court to investigate and examine the appellant at a hearing and determine whether in its discretion appellant should be tried as a youthful offender. Title 15, § 266(1), Code of Alabama; Morgan v. State, 291 Ala. 764, 287 So.2d 914.

The trial court is further instructed that the hearing be held speedily, and that a full record be made together with the court’s determination. A transcript of these proceedings, under the seal of the Clerk, will then be forwarded to this court for review. Seibold v. State, 287 Ala. 549, 253 So.2d 302.

Remanded with directions.

All the Judges concur.

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

DeCARLO, Judge.

On March 25, 1974, Larry Pride, an eighteen year old, entered a plea of guilty to robbery, then applied for probation. At the time his plea was taken, his constitutional rights, as outlined in Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274, were explained to him. It does not appear, however, that at any time prior to the taking of the plea he was ever informed of his right to request youthful offender status. Counsel for appellant contends that the court erred in accepting defendant’s guilty plea without ascertaining whether he had knowledge of this right to request to be considered a youthful offender.

We are of the opinion that the cause must be remanded to the court to investigate and examine the appellant at a hearing and determine whether in its discretion appellant should be tried as a youthful offender. Title 15, § 266(1), Code of Alabama; Morgan v. State, 291 Ala. 764, 287 So.2d 914.

The trial court is further instructed that the hearing be held speedily, and that a full record be made together with the court’s determination. A transcript of these proceedings, under the seal of the Clerk, will then be forwarded to this court for review. Seibold v. State, 287 Ala. 549, 253 So.2d 302.

Remanded with directions.

All the Judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

317 So. 2d 541, 55 Ala. App. 575, 1974 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 1041, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pride-v-state-alacrimapp-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack