Code of Alabama
Ala. Code § 15-3-8 (2026)
Crimes Punishable Under Different Provisions.
✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
Any act or omission declared criminal and punishable in different ways by different provisions of law shall be punished only under one of such provisions, and a conviction or acquittal under any one shall bar a prosecution for the same act or omission under any other provision.
(Code 1923, §5204; Code 1940, T. 15, §287.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17
cases, 1980–2019 · leading case: Brooks v. State, 973 So. 2d 380 (Ala. Crim. App. 2007).
Brooks v. State, 973 So. 2d 380 (Ala. Crim. App. 2007). “' "`§ 15-3-8. Crimes Punishable under different provisions.”
Vason v. State, 574 So. 2d 860 (Ala. Crim. App. 1990). “Ala.Code 1975, § 15-3-8, provides: "Any act or omission declared criminal and punishable in different ways by different provisions of law shall be punished only under one of such provisions, and a conviction or acquittal under any one shall bar a prosecution for the same act or…”
Sears v. State, 479 So. 2d 1308 (Ala. Crim. App. 1985). “In addition to determining that Sears's cumulative punishments are not violative of the double jeopardy clause's protection from multiple punishments for the "same offense," we must further determine if § 15-3-8, Code of Alabama 1975, applies and thus prohibits Sears's multiple…”
Ex Parte Howard, 710 So. 2d 460 (Ala. 1997). “That conviction also violates Ala.Code 1975, § 15-3-8, [1] which reads: "Any act or omission declared criminal and punishable in different ways by different provisions of law shall be punished only under one of such provisions, and a conviction or acquittal under any one shall…”
Dawson v. State, 675 So. 2d 897 (Ala. Crim. App. 1995). “1992), applying § 15-3-8, stated: "`[T]he appellate courts of this state have consistently held that where a defendant is charged with both burglary and theft (or larceny) arising from a transaction that is the foundation for both charges, the defendant may receive only one…”
McKinney v. State, 511 So. 2d 220 (Ala. 1987). “§ 15-3-8. Crimes Punishable under different provisions.”
Ex Parte Rowell, 447 So. 2d 196 (Ala. 1984). “2d 193 , in my opinion, overlooks Code 1975, § 15-3-8: "Any act or omission declared criminal and punishable in different ways by different provisions of law shall be punished only under one of such provisions and a conviction or acquittal under any one shall bar a prosecution…”
McLemore v. State, 562 So. 2d 639 (Ala. Crim. App. 1990). “McLemore contends that consecutive sentences are impermissible under Ala.Code 1975, § 15-3-8, which provides in pertinent part: "Any act or omission declared criminal and punishable in different ways by different provisions of law shall be punished only under one of such…”
Ex Parte State, 528 So. 2d 1159 (Ala. 1988). “However, our evaluation of the wisdom of the legislature's action can have no bearing on the construction to be given statutes where the legislature clearly speaks.”
Pardue v. State, 571 So. 2d 320 (Ala. Crim. App. 1989). “Although § 15-3-8, Code of Alabama 1975, does not forbid double conviction for these offenses, it does forbid double punishment.”
State v. Esco, 911 So. 2d 48 (Ala. Crim. App. 2005). “It is pertinent to note, however, that Alabama has a statute, § 15-3-8, Code 1975, which provides legislative protection against double jeopardy beyond the *53 protection provided by the constitution.”
Bros. v. State, 531 So. 2d 317 (Ala. Crim. App. 1988). “See § 15-3-8, Code of Alabama (1975). The State contends that the offenses should be treated as separate convictions, despite their receiving a single sentence, while the appellant argues that they should constitute only one conviction for habitual felony offender purposes.”
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.