From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gray v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama
Jun 3, 1977
346 So. 2d 978 (Ala. 1977)

Opinion

SC 2106.

June 3, 1977.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Madison County, David R. Archer, J.

William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen., and Jack A. Blumenfeld, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Donald H. Spencer, Huntsville, for respondent.


The petition in this case was based on an alleged conflict with prior decisions of the Court of Criminal Appeals, however, the petitioner failed to comply with the requirements of Rule 39 (c)(4), ARAP, in preparing his petition. For this reason the writ must be quashed as having been improvidently granted.

WRIT QUASHED AS IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED.

BLOODWORTH, FAULKNER, ALMON and EMBRY, JJ., concur.


I respectfully dissent.

Although I agree that a strict construction of Rule 39 would have justified denial of the writ on preliminary examination, having granted it, however, this court, in my opinion, should address the merits of the petition.

MADDOX, JONES and BEATTY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Gray v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama
Jun 3, 1977
346 So. 2d 978 (Ala. 1977)
Case details for

Gray v. State

Case Details

Full title:In re McArthur GRAY v. STATE of Alabama. Ex parte State of Alabama ex rel…

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Jun 3, 1977

Citations

346 So. 2d 978 (Ala. 1977)

Citing Cases

Wilbourn v. State

Underwood v. State, 33 Ala. App. 314, 33 So.2d 379 (1948). `No proposition of law is more fundamental than…

Kellett v. State

Underwood v. State, 33 Ala. App. 314, 33 So.2d 379 (1948). 'No proposition of law is more fundamental than…