presumptive prejudice standard in Alabama

2014"The presumptive-prejudice standard recognized in Rideau v. Louisiana , 373 U.S. 723 , 83 S.Ct. 1417 , 10 L.Ed.2d 663 (1963), is to be applied only in extreme situations in which a defendant can show that he or she cannot receive a fair trial because the community was so saturated with prejudicial pretrial publicity. [The defendant] did not make a showing that his case is in that rare category.

2014"The presumptive-prejudice standard recognized in Rideau v. Louisiana , 373 U.S. 723 , 83 S.Ct. 1417 , 10 L.Ed.2d 663 (1963), is to be applied only in extreme situations in which a defendant can show that he or she cannot receive a fair trial because the community was so saturated with prejudicial pretrial publicity. [The defendant] did not make a showing that his case is in that rare category.

2002We note that `the presumptive prejudice standard... is only "rarely" applicable ... and is reserved for an "extreme situation." `... `In short, the burden placed upon the petitioner to show that pretrial publicity deprived him of his right to a fair trial before an impartial *476 jury is an extremely heavy one.'" "` United States v. Lehder-Rivas, 955 F.2d 1510, 1524 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 924 , 113 S.Ct. 347 , 121 L.Ed.2d 262 (1992). "`Our review convinces this Court that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a change of venue. "`"`The trial court'

1994We note that 'the presumptive prejudice standard . . . is only "rarely" applicable . . . and is reserved for an "extreme situation." ' . . . 'In short, the burden placed upon the petitioner to show that pretrial publicity deprived him of his right to a fair trial before an impartial jury is an extremely heavy one.' " United States v. Lehder-Rivas , 955 F.2d 1510 , 1524 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 113 S.Ct. 347 , 121 L.Ed.2d 262 (1992).

2002We note that `the presumptive prejudice standard... is only "rarely" applicable ... and is reserved for an "extreme situation." `... `In short, the burden placed upon the petitioner to show that pretrial publicity deprived him of his right to a fair trial before an impartial *476 jury is an extremely heavy one.'" "` United States v. Lehder-Rivas, 955 F.2d 1510, 1524 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 924 , 113 S.Ct. 347 , 121 L.Ed.2d 262 (1992). "`Our review convinces this Court that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a change of venue. "`"`The trial court'

1999"In short, the burden placed upon the petitioner to show that pretrial publicity deprived him of his right to a fair trial before an impartial jury is an extremely heavy one."' " United States v. Lehder-Rivas, 955 F.2d 1510, 1524 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 924 , 113 S.Ct. 347 , 121 L.Ed.2d 262 (1992).

2013“In fact, our research has uncovered only a very few ... cases in which relief was granted on the basis of presumed prejudice.” Coleman v. Kemp, 778 F.2d at 1490.’ “Hunt, 642 So.2d at 1042^3. “ ‘In order to show community saturation [under the “presumed prejudice” standard], the appellant must show more than the fact “that a case generates even widespread publicity.” Thompson v. State, 581 So.2d 1216, 1233 (Ala.Cr.App.1991), cert. denied, [502] U.S. [1030], 112 S.Ct. 868 , 116 L.Ed.2d 774 (1992). “ ‘Newspaper articles alone would not necessitate' a change of venue unless it was shown that the

2010“In order to show community saturation [under the ‘presumed prejudice’ stan dard], the appellant must show more than the fact ‘that a case generates even widespread publicity.’ Thompson v. State, 581 So.2d 1216, 1233 (Ala.Cr.App.1991), cert. denied, [502] U.S. [1030], 112 S.Ct. 868 , 116 L.Ed.2d 774 (1992). ‘ “Newspaper articles alone would not necessitate a change of venue unless it was shown that the articles so affected the general citizenry through the insertion of such sensational, accusational or denunciatory statements, that a fair and impartial trial was impossible.

2002We note that `the presumptive prejudice standard... is only "rarely" applicable ... and is reserved for an "extreme situation." `... `In short, the burden placed upon the petitioner to show that pretrial publicity deprived him of his right to a fair trial before an impartial *476 jury is an extremely heavy one.'" "` United States v. Lehder-Rivas, 955 F.2d 1510, 1524 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 924 , 113 S.Ct. 347 , 121 L.Ed.2d 262 (1992). "`Our review convinces this Court that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a change of venue. "`"`The trial court'

1994Our review convinces this Court that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a change of venue. " 'The trial court's findings of impartiality should be overturned only for "manifest error." Irvin v. Dowd , 366 U.S. 717 , 724 , 81 S.Ct. 1639 , 1643 , 6 L.Ed.2d 751 (1961).' Fortenberry v. State , [ 545 So.2d 129 (Ala.Cr.App. 1988), affirmed, 545 So.2d 145 (Ala. 1989), cert. denied, 495 U.S. 911 , 110 S.Ct. 1937 , 109 L.Ed.2d 300 (1990)]. 'Absent a showing of abuse of discretion, a trial court's ruling on a motion for change of venue will not be overturned.

2002We note that `the presumptive prejudice standard... is only "rarely" applicable ... and is reserved for an "extreme situation." `... `In short, the burden placed upon the petitioner to show that pretrial publicity deprived him of his right to a fair trial before an impartial *476 jury is an extremely heavy one.'" "` United States v. Lehder-Rivas, 955 F.2d 1510, 1524 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 924 , 113 S.Ct. 347 , 121 L.Ed.2d 262 (1992). "`Our review convinces this Court that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a change of venue. "`"`The trial court'

1994Our review convinces this Court that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a change of venue. " 'The trial court's findings of impartiality should be overturned only for "manifest error." Irvin v. Dowd , 366 U.S. 717 , 724 , 81 S.Ct. 1639 , 1643 , 6 L.Ed.2d 751 (1961).' Fortenberry v. State , [ 545 So.2d 129 (Ala.Cr.App. 1988), affirmed, 545 So.2d 145 (Ala. 1989), cert. denied, 495 U.S. 911 , 110 S.Ct. 1937 , 109 L.Ed.2d 300 (1990)]. 'Absent a showing of abuse of discretion, a trial court's ruling on a motion for change of venue will not be overturned.

2002We note that `the presumptive prejudice standard... is only "rarely" applicable ... and is reserved for an "extreme situation." `... `In short, the burden placed upon the petitioner to show that pretrial publicity deprived him of his right to a fair trial before an impartial *476 jury is an extremely heavy one.'" "` United States v. Lehder-Rivas, 955 F.2d 1510, 1524 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 924 , 113 S.Ct. 347 , 121 L.Ed.2d 262 (1992). "`Our review convinces this Court that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a change of venue. "`"`The trial court'

1994Our review convinces this Court that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a change of venue. " 'The trial court's findings of impartiality should be overturned only for "manifest error." Irvin v. Dowd , 366 U.S. 717 , 724 , 81 S.Ct. 1639 , 1643 , 6 L.Ed.2d 751 (1961).' Fortenberry v. State , [ 545 So.2d 129 (Ala.Cr.App. 1988), affirmed, 545 So.2d 145 (Ala. 1989), cert. denied, 495 U.S. 911 , 110 S.Ct. 1937 , 109 L.Ed.2d 300 (1990)]. 'Absent a showing of abuse of discretion, a trial court's ruling on a motion for change of venue will not be overturned.

2002We note that `the presumptive prejudice standard... is only "rarely" applicable ... and is reserved for an "extreme situation." `... `In short, the burden placed upon the petitioner to show that pretrial publicity deprived him of his right to a fair trial before an impartial *476 jury is an extremely heavy one.'" "` United States v. Lehder-Rivas, 955 F.2d 1510, 1524 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 924 , 113 S.Ct. 347 , 121 L.Ed.2d 262 (1992). "`Our review convinces this Court that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a change of venue. "`"`The trial court'

2002We note that `the presumptive prejudice standard... is only "rarely" applicable ... and is reserved for an "extreme situation." `... `In short, the burden placed upon the petitioner to show that pretrial publicity deprived him of his right to a fair trial before an impartial *476 jury is an extremely heavy one.'" "` United States v. Lehder-Rivas, 955 F.2d 1510, 1524 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 924 , 113 S.Ct. 347 , 121 L.Ed.2d 262 (1992). "`Our review convinces this Court that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a change of venue. "`"`The trial court'

2002We note that `the presumptive prejudice standard... is only "rarely" applicable ... and is reserved for an "extreme situation." `... `In short, the burden placed upon the petitioner to show that pretrial publicity deprived him of his right to a fair trial before an impartial *476 jury is an extremely heavy one.'" "` United States v. Lehder-Rivas, 955 F.2d 1510, 1524 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 924 , 113 S.Ct. 347 , 121 L.Ed.2d 262 (1992). "`Our review convinces this Court that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a change of venue. "`"`The trial court'

1994Our review convinces this Court that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a change of venue. " 'The trial court's findings of impartiality should be overturned only for "manifest error." Irvin v. Dowd , 366 U.S. 717 , 724 , 81 S.Ct. 1639 , 1643 , 6 L.Ed.2d 751 (1961).' Fortenberry v. State , [ 545 So.2d 129 (Ala.Cr.App. 1988), affirmed, 545 So.2d 145 (Ala. 1989), cert. denied, 495 U.S. 911 , 110 S.Ct. 1937 , 109 L.Ed.2d 300 (1990)]. 'Absent a showing of abuse of discretion, a trial court's ruling on a motion for change of venue will not be overturned.

1995Nebraska Press Ass'n v. Stuart , 427 U.S. 539 , 554 , 96 S.Ct. 2791 , 2800 , 49 L.Ed.2d 683 (1986), and is reserved for an "extreme situation." Mayola v. State of Alabama , 623 F.2d 992 (5th Cir. 1980).

1992Nebraska Press Ass'n v. Stuart , 427 U.S. 539 , 554 , 96 S.Ct. 2791 , 2800 , 49 L.Ed.2d 683 (1986), and is reserved for an "extreme situation." Mayola v. State of Alabama , 623 F.2d 992 (5th Cir. 1980).

1995Nebraska Press Ass'n v. Stuart , 427 U.S. 539 , 554 , 96 S.Ct. 2791 , 2800 , 49 L.Ed.2d 683 (1986), and is reserved for an "extreme situation." Mayola v. State of Alabama , 623 F.2d 992 (5th Cir. 1980).

1995Nebraska Press Ass'n v. Stuart , 427 U.S. 539 , 554 , 96 S.Ct. 2791 , 2800 , 49 L.Ed.2d 683 (1986), and is reserved for an "extreme situation." Mayola v. State of Alabama , 623 F.2d 992 (5th Cir. 1980).

2014We hold that the trial court did not abuse its substantial discretion when it denied [the defendant's] motion for a change of venue." 123 So.3d at 1051 .

2002Ex parte Magwood, 426 So.2d 929, 931 (Ala.), cert. denied, 462 U.S. 1124 , 103 S.Ct. 3097 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1355 (1983).' Ex parte Grayson, 479 So.2d [76, 80 (Ala.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 189 , 88 L.Ed.2d 157 (1985)].

2002Ex parte Magwood, 426 So.2d 929, 931 (Ala.), cert. denied, 462 U.S. 1124 , 103 S.Ct. 3097 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1355 (1983).' Ex parte Grayson, 479 So.2d [76, 80 (Ala.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 189 , 88 L.Ed.2d 157 (1985)].

2002Ex parte Magwood, 426 So.2d 929, 931 (Ala.), cert. denied, 462 U.S. 1124 , 103 S.Ct. 3097 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1355 (1983).' Ex parte Grayson, 479 So.2d [76, 80 (Ala.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 189 , 88 L.Ed.2d 157 (1985)].

2002Ex parte Magwood, 426 So.2d 929, 931 (Ala.), cert. denied, 462 U.S. 1124 , 103 S.Ct. 3097 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1355 (1983).' Ex parte Grayson, 479 So.2d [76, 80 (Ala.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 189 , 88 L.Ed.2d 157 (1985)].