Small v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Small v. State

615 So. 2d 1327, 1993 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 168, 1993 WL 35217

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama·Decided February 12, 1993·No. CR-91-1714·Published

Opinion

MONTIEL, Judge.

Fernando Demandes Small filed a petition styled as a petition for a writ of habe-as corpus. While the trial court properly treated the petition as a post-conviction proceeding under Rule 32, A.R.Cr.P., it did not give the appellant the opportunity to file a petition in the form required by 32.-6(a), A.R.Crim.P. Therefore, this case is remanded to the Mobile Circuit Court with directions that the appellant’s petition be returned to him so that he can have the opportunity to file a proper Rule 32 petition as required by Rule 32.6, A.R.Crim.P. Drayton v. State, 600 So.2d 1088 (Ala. Crim.App.1992); Nickerson v. State, 597 So.2d 762 (Ala.Crim.App.1992).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All Judges concur.

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

MONTIEL, Judge.

Fernando Demandes Small filed a petition styled as a petition for a writ of habe-as corpus. While the trial court properly treated the petition as a post-conviction proceeding under Rule 32, A.R.Cr.P., it did not give the appellant the opportunity to file a petition in the form required by 32.-6(a), A.R.Crim.P. Therefore, this case is remanded to the Mobile Circuit Court with directions that the appellant’s petition be returned to him so that he can have the opportunity to file a proper Rule 32 petition as required by Rule 32.6, A.R.Crim.P. Drayton v. State, 600 So.2d 1088 (Ala. Crim.App.1992); Nickerson v. State, 597 So.2d 762 (Ala.Crim.App.1992).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All Judges concur.

Small v. State, 615 So. 2d 1327, 1993 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 168, 1993 WL 35217 (Ala. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

615 So. 2d 1327 (Small v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related