Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

623 So. 2d 353

Whited v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Decided January 22, 1993

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · decided 1993-01-22

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently March 1993

1 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““1. Petitioner avers that his counsel was ineffective for failure to subpoena a tape recording of the transaction made the basis of the charge. Evidence revealed that this narcotics transaction took place at a service station in Auburn, Alabama. The Petitioner was with other individuals ... at that point. The evidence of his guilt was overwhelming from oral testimony in the case and other evidence presented. The Court finds there is no merit to this contention. “2. Petitioner avers that his trial counsel was ineffective for failure to subpoena telephone records. In the judgment of this Court, telephone records would have done nothing to change the situation as presented at the trial of this case. Again, Petitioner was present at the time the transaction went down and evidence of his guilt was overwhelming. There is no merit in this contention. “3. Petitioner avers that his trial counsel was ineffective for failure to file pretrial motions to make the State elect. The Court finds that there was no question as to the Section of the Statute under which this Petitioner was prosecuted and that a Motion to Elect would have done nothing to clarify the situation. The Court finds that there was no merit to this contention. “4. Petitioner avers that his counsel was ineffective for failing to object to jury instructions. The Court finds that there is no merit to this contention. “5. The Court finds that the verdict of the jury is sustained by the overwhelming weight of the evidence and ”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Whited v. State

Relies on Whited v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1993-01-22

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ON RETURN TO REMAND

TAYLOR, Judge.

¶2The appellant, Billie Nelson Whited, appealed the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief under Rule 32, A.R.Crim.P. *354We remanded this cause so that the trial court could hold an evidentiary hearing on the appellant’s allegations and make “specific findings of fact relating to each material issue of fact presented.” Rule 32.9(d), A.R.Crim.P. Whited v. State, 623 So.2d 352 (Ala.Cr.App.1992). We find it necessary to again remand this cause because the trial court failed to comply with our directions.

¶3The trial court, in ruling on the petition, stated: “The Court finds that there is no merit to any of the claims of the Defendant. The matters complained of are either not substantiated by the facts as presented at trial or constitute tactical decisions made by the defense.” The trial court failed to make findings of facts as to each material issue of fact presented. Thus, this cause is again remanded to the Circuit Court for Lee County for proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. Due return should be filed with this court within 42 days from the date of this opinion.

¶4REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

All the Judges concur.
/623/so2d/353 · .json · Public domain