Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

598 So. 2d 1009

Smith v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Decided October 25, 1991

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · decided 1991-10-25

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently November 1999

4 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“specific findings of fact relating to each material issue of fact presented. " We agree that specific issues were presented at the hearing, and we cannot say that these issues were obviously without merit. Under the circumstances of this case, we hold that the cause is due to be remanded for the circuit court to make specific findings of fact as required by Rule 32.9(d), Ala.R.Crim.P. We therefore remand the cause to the Court of Criminal Appeals for it to issue an order of remand. We take this action upon the petition for writ of certiorari, not upon the motion to remand for further evidentiary proceedings pursuant to Walker's pro se "Emergency Motion.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 652 So. 2d 198 - Ex Parte Walker

“the petitioner is entitled to notice of a specific ground of preclusion upon which the circuit court relied in dismissing the petition”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Alvis v. State

Relies on 565 So. 2d 606 - Ex Parte Rice

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1991-10-25

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1

¶2This is an appeal from the denial of a petition for post-conviction relief. Lawrence Jamison Smith, the petitioner-appellant, pleaded guilty in May 1982 to assault in the first degree and was sentenced to four years' imprisonment. Although the petitioner challenges the voluntariness of his guilty plea, the record of the guilty plea proceedings, which has been filed as a supplemental record on appeal, supports a finding of voluntariness.

¶3The circuit court denied the petition solely on the basis of the preclusion provisions of Rule 20.2, A.R.Crim.P.Temp. (now Rule 32.2, A.R.Crim.P.). A minute entry contained in the record indicates that an evidentiary hearing was held in the circuit court before the petition was denied. The record on appeal, however, contains no transcript of such a hearing. On this appeal, the attorney general has filed a "motion to remand cause for entry of specific findings of fact."

¶4Under the circumstances presented here, the motion of the attorney general has merit. If an evidentiary hearing was held, the circuit court is required to make specific findings of fact relating to each material issue of fact presented. Rule 20.9(d), A.R.Crim.P.Temp. (now Rule 32.9(d), A.R.Crim.P.). Furthermore, the petitioner is entitled to notice of the specific ground of preclusion upon which the circuit court relied in dismissing the petition. See Ex parte Rice,565 So.2d 606, 607 (Ala. 1990).

¶5Therefore, this cause is remanded to the circuit court with instructions that that court set forth the specific ground or grounds of preclusion upon which it relied in dismissing the petition for post-conviction relief. If an evidentiary hearing was held, the circuit court is further directed to comply with the provisions of Rule 20.9(d), A.R.Crim.P.Temp. Written return shall be made to this Court within 30 days from the date of this order.

¶6REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

¶7All Judges concur.

/598/so2d/1009 · .json · Public domain