Code of Alabama
Ala. Code § 15-21-1 (2026)
Persons Entitled to Prosecute Writ - Generally.
✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
Any person who is imprisoned or restrained of his liberty in the State of Alabama on any criminal charge or accusation or under any other pretense whatever, except persons committed or detained by virtue of process issued by a court of the United States or by a judge thereof in cases of which such courts have exclusive jurisdiction under the laws of the United States or have acquired exclusive jurisdiction by the commencement of actions in such courts, may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus according to the provisions of this chapter to inquire into the cause of such imprisonment or restraint.
(Code 1852, §709; Code 1867, §4260; Code 1876, §4936; Code 1886, §4761; Code 1896, §4812; Code 1907, §7007; Code 1923, §4305; Code 1940, T. 15, §1.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1978–2022 · leading case: Cook v. Bentley, 202 So. 3d 316 (Ala. 2016).
Cook v. Bentley, 202 So. 3d 316 (Ala. 2016). “In addition, § 14-15-2 expressly provides that the APLRA does not apply to actions brought pursuant to § 15-21-1, Ala.Code 1975, which governs habeas corpus proceedings.”
Smith v. State, 918 So. 2d 141 (Ala. Crim. App. 2005). “Rule 32 did not abolish the substantive right to postconviction review under the statutory remedy of habeas corpus; it merely changed the procedure for seeking habeas corpus relief in most situations, which had been previously governed by the procedures set out in §§ 15-21-1…”
Collier v. State, 64 So. 3d 1045 (Ala. 2010). “Collier argues that §§ 15-21-1 through -34, Ala.Code 1975, dealing with habeas corpus petitions apply only if this Court has not adopted a different procedure.”
Taunton v. State, 562 So. 2d 615 (Ala. 1990). “4 The legislature has indeed prescribed the procedure for filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus in Ala.Code 1975, §§ 15-21-1 through 15-21-34, and those Code sections apply to pre-trial detentions, persons confined as insane, and certain post-trial detentions not provided…”
Luckie v. State, 502 So. 2d 870 (Ala. Crim. App. 1986). “I, § 17; Ala. Code §§ 15-21-1 through 34. The “suspension” of the writ, which is prohibited by our constitution, means the denial to the citizen of the right to demand an investigation into the cause of his detention.”
Brown v. State, 429 So. 2d 674 (Ala. Crim. App. 1983). “” No provision in the entire Alabama statutory procedure as to habeas corpus, § 15-21-1 through § 15-21-34, contemplates a hearing on the application or the petition unless and until grounds for the issuance of the writ are presented by the petition or application.”
Mayes v. Stephens (N.D. Ala. 2020). “In any event, if Mayes’s motion to dismiss fails, he may also file a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Ala. Code § 15-21-1 . See Crandle v. Oliver, No.”
Merritt v. Booker, 362 So. 2d 878 (Ala. 1978). “Although the procedure in that section was not followed in this case, it does not affect the outcome of this appeal since James Merritt’s petition failed to meet the minimum requirements necessary to cause the writ of habeas corpus to issue.”
State v. Henley, 675 So. 2d 557 (Ala. Crim. App. 1996). “) The reasoning of Vick is in keeping with § 15-21-1, et seq., Code of Alabama 1975, the “Habeas Corpus” chapter of the Alabama Code.”
Brown v. State of Alabama (INMATE 3) (M.D. Ala. 2022). “CODE § 15-21-1 (“Any person who is … restrained of his liberty in the State of Alabama on any criminal charge or accusation or under any other pretense whatever … may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus according to the provisions of this chapter… .”
State v. R.D., 742 So. 2d 197 (Ala. Crim. App. 1999). “The postconviction petition in this case was not a “habeas corpus” petition within the meaning of § 15-21-1. What R.D. also fails to consider is that he has already been convicted and sentenced, and he has sought review by direct appeal.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.