Steele v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Steele v. State

571 So. 2d 412, 1990 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 2062, 1990 WL 237220

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

DecidedNovember 30, 1990

DocketCR 89-177

StatusPublished

This text of 571 So. 2d 412 (Steele 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

Steele v. State, 571 So. 2d 412, 1990 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 2062, 1990 WL 237220 (Ala. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

TAYLOR, Judge.

The appellant, Howard Lugene Steele, was convicted of the sale of a compressed material containing cocaine, a violation of § 13A-12-211, Code of Alabama 1975. He was sentenced to five years in prison. The appellant contends that the trial court erred in giving supplemental instructions to the jury when he and his counsel were not present. The record is unclear as to when counsel was absent from this phase of the proceedings. However, it is clear from the record that counsel was absent for part of the proceedings. As to the appellant himself, there is no indication in the record whether or not he was present during this time.

The trial court is respectfully directed to hold an evidentiary hearing and to make findings of fact on the question whether or not appellant and his counsel were absent from the courtroom when the court responded to the jury’s question. A statement of those findings should be returned to this court within 90 days.

REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

All the Judges concur.

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

TAYLOR, Judge.

The appellant, Howard Lugene Steele, was convicted of the sale of a compressed material containing cocaine, a violation of § 13A-12-211, Code of Alabama 1975. He was sentenced to five years in prison. The appellant contends that the trial court erred in giving supplemental instructions to the jury when he and his counsel were not present. The record is unclear as to when counsel was absent from this phase of the proceedings. However, it is clear from the record that counsel was absent for part of the proceedings. As to the appellant himself, there is no indication in the record whether or not he was present during this time.

The trial court is respectfully directed to hold an evidentiary hearing and to make findings of fact on the question whether or not appellant and his counsel were absent from the courtroom when the court responded to the jury’s question. A statement of those findings should be returned to this court within 90 days.

REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

All the Judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

571 So. 2d 412, 1990 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 2062, 1990 WL 237220, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steele-v-state-alacrimapp-1990.