In such a case of intra-appealscourt conflict, we, as the higher court, are not bound by either of the conflicting decisions. Moreover, even under the doctrine of horizontal stare decisis, the appeals court is not bound by its prior decision; the court may overrule its prior decision, see Wells v. State, 93 So. 3d 155, 166-67 (Ala. Crim. App. 2011); Bittick v. Bittick, 297 So. 3d 397, 405 n.1 (Ala. Civ. App. 2019), either expressly or sub silentio. So, on certiorari review, nothing entitles either conflicting decision to a presumption of correctness vis-à-vis the other.

In such a case of intra-appeals-court conflict, we, as the higher court, are not bound by either of the conflicting decisions. Moreover, even under the doctrine of horizontal stare decisis, the appeals court is not bound by its prior decision; the court may overrule its prior decision, see Wells v. State, 93 So.3d 155, 166-67 (Ala.Crim.App.2011); Bittick v. Bittick, 297 So.3d 397, 405 n.1 (Ala. Civ. App. 2019), either expressly or sub silentio. So, on certiorari review, nothing entitles either conflicting decision to a presumption of correctness vis-à-vis the other.

as jurisdictional because it was mandatory. Although the majority today expressly overrules only Siercks and Hawk , it also is implicitly overruling the following cases, in which this Court treated the fine in § 13A–12–281 as jurisdictional either by sua sponte taking notice of the trial court's failure to impose the fine in § 13A–12–281 or of the trial court's improper imposition of the fine in § 13A–12–281, or by being alerted to the trial court's failure to impose the fine in § 13A–12–281 by the State, and remanding for the imposition, correction, or setting aside of the fine regardless of whether the issue of the fine had been raised by the State or by the defendant at the trial level: Sistrunk v. State , 109 So.3d 205 (Ala.Crim.App.2012) ; Hinkle v. State , 86 So.3d 441 (Ala.Crim.App.2011) ; Mathews v. State , 74 So.3d 478 (Ala.Crim.App.2011) ; Holloway v. State , 995 So.2d 180 (Ala.Crim.App.2008) ; Hollaway v. State , 979 So.2d 839 (Ala.Crim.App.2007) overruled on other grounds, Wells v. State , 93 So.3d 155 (Ala.Crim.App.2011) ; S.T.E. v. State , 954 So.2d 604 (Ala.Crim.App.2006) ; O'Callaghan v. State , 945 So.2d 467 (Ala.Crim.App.2006) ; Tinker v. State , 932 So.2d 168 (Ala.Crim.App.2005) ; Freeman v. State , 839 So.2d 681 (Ala.Crim.App.2002) ; Phelps v. State , 878 So.2d 1202 (Ala.Crim.App.2002) ; Kirkland v. State , 850 So.2d 1259 (Ala.Crim.App.2002) ; Poole v. State , 846 So.2d 370 (Ala.Crim.App.2001), overruled on other grounds, Ex parte Lightfoot , 152 So.3d 445 (Ala.2013) ; Spooney v. State , 844 So.2d 615 (Ala.Crim.App.2001) ; Harris v. State , 826 So.2d 897 (Ala.Crim.App.2000) ; Williams v. State , 794 So.2d 441 (Ala.Crim.App.2000) ; Ricketson v. State , 766 So.2d 981 (Ala.Crim.App.2000) ; Wooden v. State , 822 So.2d 455 (Ala.Crim.App.2000) ; Myrick v. State , 787 So.2d 713 (Ala.Crim.App.2000) ; Lewis v. State , 794 So.2d 1241 (Ala.Crim.App.2000) ; Bonner v. State , 835 So.2d 234 (Ala.Crim.App.2000) ; Stanberry v. State , 813 So.2d 932 (Ala.Crim.App.2000) ; Laster v. State , 747 So.2d 359 (Ala.Cri