Wyatt v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Wyatt v. State

608 So. 2d 761, 1992 WL 388096

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

DecidedFebruary 28, 1992

DocketCR-90-1748

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 608 So. 2d 761 (Wyatt 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

Wyatt v. State, 608 So. 2d 761, 1992 WL 388096 (Ala. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

The appellant, Michael Earl Wyatt, appeals the revocation of his probation, contending *Page 762 that the circuit court violated his constitutional rights in that the court failed to include in its revocation order a written statement of the evidence relied upon and the specific reasons for the revocation. A review of the court's revocation order confirms that no specific findings were included.

A written statement setting forth the evidence relied upon and the reasons for revoking probation is necessary to meet the minimum constitutional requirements of due process.Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 92 S.Ct. 2593,33 L.Ed.2d 484 (1972); Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778,93 S.Ct. 1756, 36 L.Ed.2d 656 (1973). The requirements of due process "have not been changed by the United States Supreme Court and must be complied with." Grimes v. State,579 So.2d 693, 694 (Ala.Cr.App. 1991). See also Heyward v.State, 583 So.2d 1352 (Ala.Cr.App. 1991); Womack v.State, 591 So.2d 107 (Ala.Cr.App. 1991). Therefore, this cause is remanded to the Circuit Court of Madison County with directions that that court make written findings of fact as to why the appellant's probation was revoked. A copy of the circuit court's findings shall be filed with this court within 60 days from the date of this opinion.

REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

All the Judges concur.

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

The appellant, Michael Earl Wyatt, appeals the revocation of his probation, contending *Page 762 that the circuit court violated his constitutional rights in that the court failed to include in its revocation order a written statement of the evidence relied upon and the specific reasons for the revocation. A review of the court's revocation order confirms that no specific findings were included.

A written statement setting forth the evidence relied upon and the reasons for revoking probation is necessary to meet the minimum constitutional requirements of due process.Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 92 S.Ct. 2593,33 L.Ed.2d 484 (1972); Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778,93 S.Ct. 1756, 36 L.Ed.2d 656 (1973). The requirements of due process "have not been changed by the United States Supreme Court and must be complied with." Grimes v. State,579 So.2d 693, 694 (Ala.Cr.App. 1991). See also Heyward v.State, 583 So.2d 1352 (Ala.Cr.App. 1991); Womack v.State, 591 So.2d 107 (Ala.Cr.App. 1991). Therefore, this cause is remanded to the Circuit Court of Madison County with directions that that court make written findings of fact as to why the appellant's probation was revoked. A copy of the circuit court's findings shall be filed with this court within 60 days from the date of this opinion.

REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

All the Judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

608 So. 2d 761, 1992 WL 388096, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wyatt-v-state-alacrimapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack