Thompson v. State

2 Citing cases

  1. Thompson v. Nagle

    118 F.3d 1442 (11th Cir. 1997)   Cited 74 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding there was no material variance where evidence suggested cause of death differed from indicted charge

    This court has held that if an accused had the intent to commit the underlying offense at the time he murdered and the offense is committed immediately after the murder, he is guilty of murder while committing the underlying offense, and the capital murder statute still applies. It seems to be generally understood that it is impossible to say with certainty whether intercourse immediately preceded or immediately followed the murder of a female victim. Thompson v. State, 615 So.2d 129, 133 (Ala.Crim.App. 1993) (citations omitted). Because we hold that there was sufficient evidence to support Thompson's rape conviction, we need not reach the Ex Post Facto issue.

  2. Tarver v. State

    761 So. 2d 266 (Ala. Crim. App. 2000)   Cited 11 times

    Also, we have repeatedly held that the procedural bars in Rule 32 apply equally to all cases, including those in which the death penalty has been imposed. See Nicks v. State, [Ms. CR-96-2446, October 1, 1999] ___ So.2d ___ (Ala.Cr.App. 1999); Horsley v. State, 675 So.2d 908 (Ala.Cr.App. 1996); Thompson v. State, 615 So.2d 129 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 976 (1993). This claim is also procedurally barred because it could have been, but was not, raised on direct appeal. See Rule 32.2(a)(5), Ala.R.Crim.P.