Haynes v. State

3 Citing cases

  1. Haynes v. State

    335 So. 2d 208 (Ala. 1976)

    FAULKNER, Justice. Petition of Grover Jesse Haynes for Certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that Court in Haynes v. State, 58 Ala. App. ___, 335 So.2d 203. WRIT DENIED.

  2. Womack v. State

    541 So. 2d 40 (Ala. Crim. App. 1987)   Cited 2 times

    "To warrant the granting of a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence it must appear to the court that the evidence so found, if it had been considered by the jury, would have probably changed the result of the trial." Haynes v. State, 335 So.2d 203 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 335 So.2d 208 (Ala. 1976). See also Woodward v. State, 433 So.2d 1198 (Ala.Cr.App. 1983) and Cannon v. State, 416 So.2d 1097 (Ala.Cr.App. 1982).

  3. Ashurst v. State

    462 So. 2d 999 (Ala. Crim. App. 1985)   Cited 38 times
    Applying the plain error doctrine

    An accused may not be "willfully blind". Haynes v. State, 335 So.2d 203, 205 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 335 So.2d 208 (Ala. 1976). The fact that the circumstances indicating Ashurst's guilty knowledge are relatively weak or insignificant when considered individually is of no import. "For even if the jury had found that each piece of evidence, standing alone, was consistent with innocence, the jury nevertheless could reasonably have concluded that the evidence, taken as a whole, excluded every reasonable hypothesis but that of guilt."