State v. Hill

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

State v. Hill

690 So. 2d 1207, 1996 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 333, 1996 WL 731704

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

DecidedDecember 20, 1996

DocketCR-95-0114

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 690 So. 2d 1207 (State v. Hill) 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

State v. Hill, 690 So. 2d 1207, 1996 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 333, 1996 WL 731704 (Ala. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

AFTER REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

TAYLOR, Presiding Judge.

The state appealed the trial court’s order granting Charlie Hill’s motion to suppress evidence obtained as a result of an investigatory stop. We affirmed the trial court’s actions by an unpublished memorandum. See Hill v. State, 683 So.2d 1074 (Ala.Cr.App.1996) (table). In our memorandum, we held that the trial court’s ruling was correct because the stop violated the Fourth Amendment as applied to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court of Alabama reversed our judgment, stating that the stop did not violate the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. State v. Hill, 690 So.2d 1201 (Ala.1996).

The trial court’s order granting Hill’s motion to suppress is reversed pursuant to the Supreme Court’s holding in Hill. This cause is therefore remanded to the Circuit Court for Chambers County for proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All the Judges concur.

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

AFTER REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

TAYLOR, Presiding Judge.

The state appealed the trial court’s order granting Charlie Hill’s motion to suppress evidence obtained as a result of an investigatory stop. We affirmed the trial court’s actions by an unpublished memorandum. See Hill v. State, 683 So.2d 1074 (Ala.Cr.App.1996) (table). In our memorandum, we held that the trial court’s ruling was correct because the stop violated the Fourth Amendment as applied to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court of Alabama reversed our judgment, stating that the stop did not violate the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. State v. Hill, 690 So.2d 1201 (Ala.1996).

The trial court’s order granting Hill’s motion to suppress is reversed pursuant to the Supreme Court’s holding in Hill. This cause is therefore remanded to the Circuit Court for Chambers County for proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All the Judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

690 So. 2d 1207, 1996 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 333, 1996 WL 731704, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hill-alacrimapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack