Randle v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Randle v. State

581 So. 2d 577, 1991 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 1220, 1991 WL 102736

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

DecidedMay 17, 1991

Docket5 Div. 932

StatusPublished

This text of 581 So. 2d 577 (Randle 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

Randle v. State, 581 So. 2d 577, 1991 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 1220, 1991 WL 102736 (Ala. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

ON RETURN TO REMAND

McMILLAN, Judge.

Prior report: Ala.Cr.App., 554 So.2d 1137.

This cause was remanded for another sentencing hearing, with orders for the trial court to allow the State to introduce corrected copies of two foreign convictions, because the appellant was clearly on notice of their existence. Another sentencing hearing was held wherein the State was allowed to introduce certified copies of four previous convictions, one of which was not considered for sentencing purposes, as it set forth the underlying offense which was part of the indictment and conviction for the escape in the first degree. The trial court then sentenced the appellant to life in the penitentiary. The sentence is to be served concurrently with the time that the appellant was ordered to serve in two other cases, “as with all other sentences which the [appellant] has and is serving time.” The trial court properly sentenced the appellant and, therefore, this matter is affirmed.

OPINION EXTENDED; AFFIRMED.

All the Judges concur.

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

ON RETURN TO REMAND

McMILLAN, Judge.

Prior report: Ala.Cr.App., 554 So.2d 1137.

This cause was remanded for another sentencing hearing, with orders for the trial court to allow the State to introduce corrected copies of two foreign convictions, because the appellant was clearly on notice of their existence. Another sentencing hearing was held wherein the State was allowed to introduce certified copies of four previous convictions, one of which was not considered for sentencing purposes, as it set forth the underlying offense which was part of the indictment and conviction for the escape in the first degree. The trial court then sentenced the appellant to life in the penitentiary. The sentence is to be served concurrently with the time that the appellant was ordered to serve in two other cases, “as with all other sentences which the [appellant] has and is serving time.” The trial court properly sentenced the appellant and, therefore, this matter is affirmed.

OPINION EXTENDED; AFFIRMED.

All the Judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

581 So. 2d 577, 1991 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 1220, 1991 WL 102736, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/randle-v-state-alacrimapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack