Smith v. State, 488 So. 2d 19 (Ala. Crim. App. 1986). · Go Syfert
Search
Smith v. State, 488 So. 2d 19 (Ala. Crim. App. 1986). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
7 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Connally v. State (alacrimapp, 2007-04-27)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Connally v. State
Ala. Crim. App. · 2007 · confidence medium
More particularly, Hatcher failed to allege the ‘prejudice’ requirement of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), by alleging that, had counsel been effective, he would have pleaded not guilty and insisted on going to trial.”); Harris v. State, 509 So.2d 258, 258 (Ala.Crim.App.1987) (“Appellant failed to satisfy the ‘prejudice’ requirement of Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 , 106 S.Ct. 366 , 88 L.Ed.2d 203 (1985), for he did not allege in his petition that, had counsel been effective, he would have pleaded not guilty and insisted on going to …
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Henderson v. State
Ala. Crim. App. · 1990 · confidence medium
See Gwynne v. State, 499 So.2d 802, 809 (Ala. Cr.App.1986); and Brooks v. City of Birmingham, 488 So.2d 19, 22 (Ala.Cr.App. 1986) (call-trace information provided by *292 telephone company is admissible as records kept in regular course of business).
cited Cited "see" Penny v. Commonwealth
Va. Ct. App. · 1988 · signal: see · confidence high
See Brooks v. City of Birmingham, 488 So. 2d 19 (Ala. Crim.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Boatwright v. State
Ala. Crim. App. · 1986 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare Smith v. State , 488 So.2d 19 (Ala.Cr.App. 1986) (petitioner failed to allege that but for counsel's inadequacy, he would not have pled guilty).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Gary D. Smith
v.
State.
Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
Mar 11, 1986.
488 So. 2d 19
1986 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 5970
Gary D. Smith, pro se. Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and Mary Ellen Fike Forehand, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Patterson.
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published

The appellant, Gary D. Smith, appeals the summary denial of his petition for writ of error coram nobis. The only allegation cognizable under the remedy is Smith's allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel, based on the following grounds: (1) Counsel "failed to interview the purported victim of the crime to determine whether or not prima facie evidence of theft of property I existed"; and (2) counsel "failed to explain to petitioner the essential ingredients of the charge of theft of property I."

The trial court did not err in denying Smith's petition without an evidentiary hearing because his allegations were insufficient; Smith failed to satisfy the "prejudice" requirement of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668,104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), for he did not allege in his petition that, had counsel been effective, he would have pleaded not guilty and insisted on going to trial. See Hill v.Lockhart, ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. 366, 88 L.Ed.2d 203 (1985).

Accordingly, this cause is due to be, and it is hereby, affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

All Judges concur.