Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

494 So. 2d 200

Blackmon v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · decided 1986-07-15

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently February 1986

2 state decisions

Relies on 487 So. 2d 1022 - Blackmon v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1986-07-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ON RETURN TO REMAND

TAYLOR, Judge.

¶2We remanded this case for the court to conduct a hearing to determine whether the appellant McWilliams, while represented by counsel, was given an opportunity to be heard on the issue of consolidation at some time before the motion to consolidate was granted. 487 So.2d 1022. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court stated:

“Based on the evidence presented to this Court, the Court determines that Mr. — that the Defendant was in fact represented by an attorney, namely, Mr. Cunningham, at the time the Court heard argument and considered the Motion to Consolidate the cases and that is the decision of this Court based on the evidence that I’ve heard at this hearing.”

¶3We find that the procedural requirements of Rule 15.4(b), Alabama Temporary Rules of Criminal Procedure, were complied with.

¶4Having previously addressed the other issues raised by McWilliams, we now affirm his conviction and sentence.

¶5OPINION EXTENDED;

¶6AFFIRMED.

All the Judges concur.
/494/so2d/200 · .json · Public domain