From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nicastro v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama
Feb 12, 1993
624 So. 2d 667 (Ala. Crim. App. 1993)

Opinion

CR-91-861.

February 12, 1993.

Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court; James H. Hard, Judge.

Michael Angelo Nicastro, pro se.

James H. Evans, Atty. Gen., and Andy S. Poole, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Prior report: Ala. Cr. App., 624 So.2d 665.


ON RETURN TO REMAND


The appellant, Michael Angelo Nicastro, appealed from the denial of three petitions for post-conviction relief filed under Rule 32, A.R.Crim.P. We remanded this cause so that the circuit court could conduct an evidentiary hearing on the appellant's allegations. The trial court has complied with our directions and has held a hearing. However, the court failed to make "specific findings of fact relating to each material issue of fact presented" as required by Rule 32.9(d), A.R.Crim.P. Thus, this cause is again remanded to the Circuit Court for Jefferson County so that that court may comply with Rule 32.9(d), A.R.Crim.P. Due return should be filed with this court no later than 28 days from the date of this opinion.

REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

All the Judges concur.


Summaries of

Nicastro v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama
Feb 12, 1993
624 So. 2d 667 (Ala. Crim. App. 1993)
Case details for

Nicastro v. State

Case Details

Full title:Michael Angelo NICASTRO v. STATE

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Date published: Feb 12, 1993

Citations

624 So. 2d 667 (Ala. Crim. App. 1993)

Citing Cases

Nicastro v. State

The trial court complied with our directions and held a hearing. However, that court made no specific…

Ex Parte Walker

The Court of Criminal Appeals has frequently remanded causes for circuit courts to make specific findings of…