Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

392 So. 2d 1273

Smith v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Decided October 28, 1980

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · decided 1980-10-28

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently December 1996

20 state decisions

Relies on Steele v. State · 371 So. 2d 932 - Wilson v. State · 371 So. 2d 943 - Wilson v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1980-10-28

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1

¶2The defendant was indicted and convicted for robbery in the second degree. Sentence was life imprisonment under Alabama's new habitual felony statute.

¶3The crime for which the defendant was convicted occurred in May of 1980. Alabama's habitual felony offender statute became effective on July 30, 1979. See comments to Alabama Code Section 13A-5-9. The defendant contends that Section 13A-5-9 (c) is an ex post facto law as applied to him because his three prior felony convictions (burglary and grand larceny, assault with intent to murder, and grand larceny) were all committed before the effective date of the habitual offender statute. This argument is without merit for the reasons stated in Wilsonv. State, 371 So.2d 932, 940 (Ala.Cr.App. 1978), affirmed,371 So.2d 943 (Ala. 1979).

¶4Additionally, we note that this question is presented for the first time on appeal and is therefore not preserved for review.Steele v. State, 289 Ala. 186, 266 So.2d 746 (1972); Grace v.State, 369 So.2d 318 (Ala.Cr.App. 1979). *1274

¶5The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

¶6AFFIRMED.

¶7All Judges concur.

/392/so2d/1273 · .json · Public domain