Burrell v. State

7 Citing cases

  1. Hubbard v. State

    500 So. 2d 1204 (Ala. Crim. App. 1986)   Cited 62 times
    In Hubbard v. State, 500 So.2d 1204 (Ala.Crim.App. 1986), we addressed a similar issue with regard to a defendant charged with murder made capital because the defendant had been convicted of murder in the 20 years preceding the crime.

    It is clear that the consent to search may be given on actions alone. Burrell v. State, 45 Ala. App. 664, 235 So.2d 913 (1970). In Burrell this Court held that where the defendant volunteered the whereabouts of a gun, there simply was no search and hence no warrant was required.

  2. Hubbard v. State

    382 So. 2d 577 (Ala. Crim. App. 1979)   Cited 35 times
    In Hubbard v. State, 382 So.2d 577 (Ala.Cr.App. 1979), aff'd, 382 So.2d 597 (Ala. 1980), set aside on other grounds, 405 So.2d 695 (Ala. 1981), the defendant was convicted of murder made capital because he had been convicted of another murder in the 20 years preceding the charged offense.

    It is clear that the consent to search may be given on actions alone. Burrell v. State, 45 Ala. App. 664, 235 So.2d 913 (1970). In Burrell this Court held that where the defendant volunteered the whereabouts of a gun, there simply was no search and hence no warrant was required.

  3. Land v. State

    678 So. 2d 201 (Ala. Crim. App. 1995)   Cited 64 times
    Holding that warrantless search of appellant's vehicle was valid because the police had probable cause to believe that appellant had committed the crime, and the vehicle's inherent mobility was a sufficiently exigent circumstance

    Since the appellant had already told Detective Fowler that he had a .45 caliber pistol in his car, we fail to see how the appellant's privacy rights were violated by Fowler's looking in the car and seeing the pistol there. "In Burrell [ v. State, 45 Ala. App. 664, 666, 235 So.2d 913 (1970),] this Court held that where the defendant volunteered the whereabouts of a gun, there simply was no search." Hubbard v. State, 382 So.2d 577, 592 (Ala.Cr.App. 1979), affirmed, 382 So.2d 597 (Ala. 1980), set aside on other grounds, 405 So.2d 695 (Ala. 1981).

  4. Favors v. State

    355 So. 2d 103 (Ala. Crim. App. 1978)   Cited 1 times

    This was a general on-the-scene questioning of a citizen under circumstances that warranted investigation and is a well accepted police practice. Ison v. State, 281 Ala. 189, 200 So.2d 511; Burrell v. State, 45 Ala. App. 664, 235 So.2d 913. "An officer in the normal course of his patrol at 4:00 A.M., can stop a driver and ask for some identification under the circumstances depicted in this case.

  5. Mack v. State

    348 So. 2d 524 (Ala. Crim. App. 1977)   Cited 34 times

    This was not a search and no search warrant was required. Burrell v. State, 45 Ala. App. 664, 235 So.2d 913 (1970). The appellant testified that he carried the pistol for "protection" and kept it under the mattress in the room where he slept.

  6. Wright v. State

    312 So. 2d 417 (Ala. Crim. App. 1975)   Cited 4 times

    This was a general on-the-scene questioning of a citizen under circumstances that warranted investigation and is a well accepted police practice. Ison v. State, 281 Ala. 189, 200 So.2d 511; Burrell v. State, 45 Ala. App. 664, 235 So.2d 913. An officer in the normal course of his patrol at 4:00 A.M., can stop a driver and ask for some identification under the circumstances depicted in this case.

  7. Cobb v. State

    50 Ala. App. 707 (Ala. Crim. App. 1973)   Cited 39 times

    There has not been a "willful suppression of evidence" where the State does not inform defense counsel that the defendant voluntarily gave a fictitious name to police officers who had not taken the individual into custody or arrested the individual where it is not shown that the district attorney even knew of the event, and, in that, the mere giving of a fictitious name does not amount to a "written or oral statement given to law enforcement officers" as that term is used in a motion to produce and as the same term is used in the cases involving "Miranda warning" admissions or confessions. The giving of a fictitious name would simply be a voluntary statement, and where the attending circumstances clearly show the voluntariness of the statement, it is admissible. Ison v. State, 281 Ala. 189, 200 So.2d 511; Burrell v. State, 45 Ala. App. 664, 235 So.2d 913; Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694; WORDS AND PHRASES, Vol. 20A, p. 400, Vol. 40, p. 56 et seq. TYSON, Judge.