Weaise v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Weaise v. State

615 So. 2d 1277, 1993 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 105, 1993 WL 10337

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

DecidedJanuary 22, 1993

DocketCR-91-1144

StatusPublished

This text of 615 So. 2d 1277 (Weaise 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

Weaise v. State, 615 So. 2d 1277, 1993 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 105, 1993 WL 10337 (Ala. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

MONTIEL, Judge.

Thomas Baxter Weaise filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus with the Elmore Circuit Court. The State argued that the matters raised in the petition should be addressed in a Rule 32, A.R.Crim.P., petition and stated that the cause should be transferred to the court of original conviction and that the petition should be returned to Weaise so that he could file a petition in the proper form. The cause was transferred to Baldwin Circuit Court. However, that court dismissed the petition without returning it to Weaise to allow him to comply with Rule 32.6, A.R.Crim.P. Therefore, this cause must be reversed and remanded to the Baldwin Circuit Court. Drayton v. State, 600 So.2d 1088 (Ala. Crim.App.1992); Nickerson v. State, 597 So.2d 762 (Ala.Crim.App.1992).

If Weaise fails to file a proper Rule 32 petition within a reasonable time and continues to insist that the petition should be treated as a habeas corpus petition, the trial court may dismiss the petition.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All the Judges concur.

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

MONTIEL, Judge.

Thomas Baxter Weaise filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus with the Elmore Circuit Court. The State argued that the matters raised in the petition should be addressed in a Rule 32, A.R.Crim.P., petition and stated that the cause should be transferred to the court of original conviction and that the petition should be returned to Weaise so that he could file a petition in the proper form. The cause was transferred to Baldwin Circuit Court. However, that court dismissed the petition without returning it to Weaise to allow him to comply with Rule 32.6, A.R.Crim.P. Therefore, this cause must be reversed and remanded to the Baldwin Circuit Court. Drayton v. State, 600 So.2d 1088 (Ala. Crim.App.1992); Nickerson v. State, 597 So.2d 762 (Ala.Crim.App.1992).

If Weaise fails to file a proper Rule 32 petition within a reasonable time and continues to insist that the petition should be treated as a habeas corpus petition, the trial court may dismiss the petition.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All the Judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

615 So. 2d 1277, 1993 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 105, 1993 WL 10337, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weaise-v-state-alacrimapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack