Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

881 So. 2d 542

King v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · decided 2002-04-26

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently September 2007

3 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“to revisit its decisions in Ex parte Johnson and Ex parte Fountain and to clarify what is the appropriate procedure for seeking an out-of-time appeal from the denial or dismissal of a prior Rule 32 petition”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Marshall v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2002-04-26

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1

¶2I concur with the majority's opinion. However, I write specially to urge the Alabama Supreme Court to revisit its decisions in Ex parte Johnson and Ex parte Fountain and to clarify what is the appropriate procedure for seeking an out-of-time appeal from the denial or dismissal of a prior Rule 32 petition. *545

/881/so2d/542 · .json · Public domain