In the interim, Petitioner did not file a motion for new trial in which he could have raised the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel. See, Scoggins v. State, 398 So.2d 353 (Ala.Crim.App. 1981) (ineffective assistance of counsel will support a motion for new trial). The question of an appeal was presented three months later when Petitioner filed a 'motion for permission to appeal out of time.'

Consequently, the denial of the motion for new trial was not error. Hull v. State, 232 Ala. 281, 282, 167 So. 553 (1936). See also Kelly v. State, 423 So.2d 343 (Ala.Cr.App. 1982); Scoggins v. State, 398 So.2d 353 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 398 So.2d 357 (Ala. 1981); McKinnis v. State, 392 So.2d 1266 (Ala.Cr.App. 1980), cert. denied, 392 So.2d 1270 (Ala. 1981). We also note that the motion for new trial is not verified and states only general grounds for relief ("That the defendant was not represented by competent counsel on the trial of this cause").