10 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1996–2015 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alabama courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Ex Parte Jamesgreen2 sentences2015The officer may also conduct a patdown search of the outer clothing of the person if the officer “is justified in believing that the individual whose suspicious behavior he is investigating at close range is armed and presently dangerous to the officer or to others.” ’ “James, 797 So.2d at 414-15 (emphasis in James), quoting Terry, 392 U.S. at 24 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 .” W.D.H., 16 So.3d at 126 . 2009The officer may also conduct a patdown search of the outer clothing of the person if the officer is “justified in believing that the individual whose suspicious behavior he is investigating at close range is armed and presently dangerous to the officer or to others.” ’ “James, 797 So.2d at 414-15 (emphasis in James), quoting Terry, 392 U.S. at 24 . | 4 | 4 |
Wong Sun v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2015See Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 , 83 S.Ct. 407 , 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963); Ex parte Stokes, 552 So.2d 144, 145 (Ala.1989) (“Because the evidence is insufficient to support an arrest for ‘highway intoxication,’ the drugs discovered in Stokes’s possession were ‘fruit of the poisonous tree’ and should have been suppressed.”). 2015See Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 , 83 S.Ct. 407 , 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963); Ex parte Stokes, 552 So.2d 144, 145 (Ala.1989) (“Because the evidence is insufficient to support an arrest for ‘highway intoxication,’ the drugs discovered in Stokes’s possession were ‘fruit of the poisonous tree’ and should have been suppressed.”). | 1 | 1 |
Stokes v. Stategreen1 sentence2015See Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 , 83 S.Ct. 407 , 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963); Ex parte Stokes, 552 So.2d 144, 145 (Ala.1989) (“Because the evidence is insufficient to support an arrest for ‘highway intoxication,’ the drugs discovered in Stokes’s possession were ‘fruit of the poisonous tree’ and should have been suppressed.”). | 1 | 1 |
Ex Parte Crymesgreen1 sentence2012Ex parte Crymes, 630 So.2d 125, 126 (Ala.1993).” (James’s brief, pp. 19-20.) The above-quoted passages are nearly exhaustive of the arguments presented by James in the five-page argument section of his brief. | 1 | 1 |
Jenkins v. Stategreen1 sentence2012See Jenkins v. State, 472 So.2d 1128, 1130 (Ala.Crim.App.1985) (finding prejudice because ‘the overwhelming likelihood that proof that [the defendant] was guilty of one offense was used to convict him of another even though proof of that guilt would have been inadmissible at a separate trial’) (James’s brief, p. 18 (quoting Tillman v. State, 89 So.3d at 839 , quoting in turn Tillman’s brief, p. 34)). | 1 | 1 |
Tillman v. Stategreen2 sentences2012In all four theft cases, there was no evidence to connect [James] with the stolen pickup, utility trailer, backhoe or ATM machine.” (James’s brief, pp. 17-18.) To further this argument, James provides the following from Tillman v. State, 89 So.3d 832 (Ala.Crim.App.2011): “The prejudice from consolidation was particularly acute in this case because the State’s evidence of the forgery was much stronger than its evidence that Mr. Tillman intended to kill. 2012See Jenkins v. State, 472 So.2d 1128, 1130 (Ala.Crim.App.1985) (finding prejudice because ‘the overwhelming likelihood that proof that [the defendant] was guilty of one offense was used to convict him of another even though proof of that guilt would have been inadmissible at a separate trial’) (James’s brief, p. 18 (quoting Tillman v. State, 89 So.3d at 839 , quoting in turn Tillman’s brief, p. 34)). | 1 | 1 |
SOUTHTRUST BANK v. Webb-Stiles Co., Inc.green1 sentence2011SouthTrust Bank of Alabama, N.A. v. Webb-Stiles Co., 931 So.2d 706, 708 (Ala.2005) (quoting Ormco Corp. v. Johns, 869 So.2d 1109, 1113 (Ala.2003), quoting in turn Perley v. Tapscan, Inc., 646 So.2d 585, 587 (Ala.1994)). | 1 | 1 |
Ormco Corp. v. Johnsgreen1 sentence2011SouthTrust Bank of Alabama, N.A. v. Webb-Stiles Co., 931 So.2d 706, 708 (Ala.2005) (quoting Ormco Corp. v. Johns, 869 So.2d 1109, 1113 (Ala.2003), quoting in turn Perley v. Tapscan, Inc., 646 So.2d 585, 587 (Ala.1994)). | 1 | 1 |
Perley v. Tapscan, Inc.green1 sentence2011SouthTrust Bank of Alabama, N.A. v. Webb-Stiles Co., 931 So.2d 706, 708 (Ala.2005) (quoting Ormco Corp. v. Johns, 869 So.2d 1109, 1113 (Ala.2003), quoting in turn Perley v. Tapscan, Inc., 646 So.2d 585, 587 (Ala.1994)). | 1 | 1 |
Hamm v. Stategreen1 sentence2010P. 9 As we stated in Franklin v. State, 23 So.3d 694, 703 (Ala.Crim.App.2008): “It is well settled that ‘[r]ecitation of allegations without citation to any legal authority and without adequate recitation of the facts relied upon has been deemed a waiver of the arguments listed.’ Hamm v. State, 913 So.2d 460, 486 (Ala.Crim.App.2002). ‘An appellate court will consider only those issues properly delineated as such and will not search out errors which have not been properly preserved or assigned. | 1 | 1 |
Franklin v. Stategreen1 sentence2010P. 9 As we stated in Franklin v. State, 23 So.3d 694, 703 (Ala.Crim.App.2008): “It is well settled that ‘[r]ecitation of allegations without citation to any legal authority and without adequate recitation of the facts relied upon has been deemed a waiver of the arguments listed.’ Hamm v. State, 913 So.2d 460, 486 (Ala.Crim.App.2002). ‘An appellate court will consider only those issues properly delineated as such and will not search out errors which have not been properly preserved or assigned. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Terry v. Ohio
green
2 sentences2015The officer may also conduct a patdown search of the outer clothing of the person if the officer “is justified in believing that the individual whose suspicious behavior he is investigating at close range is armed and presently dangerous to the officer or to others.” ’ “James, 797 So.2d at 414-15 (emphasis in James), quoting Terry, 392 U.S. at 24 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 .” W.D.H., 16 So.3d at 126 . 2015The officer may also conduct a patdown search of the outer clothing of the person if the officer “is justified in believing that the individual whose suspicious behavior he is investigating at close range is armed and presently dangerous to the officer or to others.” ’ “James, 797 So.2d at 414-15 (emphasis in James), quoting Terry, 392 U.S. at 24 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 .” W.D.H., 16 So.3d at 126 . | 4 | 2008–2015 |
WDH v. State
green
1 sentence2015The officer may also conduct a patdown search of the outer clothing of the person if the officer “is justified in believing that the individual whose suspicious behavior he is investigating at close range is armed and presently dangerous to the officer or to others.” ’ “James, 797 So.2d at 414-15 (emphasis in James), quoting Terry, 392 U.S. at 24 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 .” W.D.H., 16 So.3d at 126 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. James
green
1 sentence2013In State v. James, 767 P.2d 549 (Utah 1989), the Utah Supreme Court addressed an interlocutory appeal involving the circuit court’s denial of James’s motion for a change of venue after James was charged with murdering his three-month-old child by throwing the infant into a river. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Ex Parte Clemons
green
2 sentences2010The Alabama Supreme Court reversed this Court’s judgment based on its earlier decision in Ex parte Clemons, 55 So.3d 348 (Ala.2007), and remanded the case for this Court to consider the merits of James’s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims and the in forma pauperis claim. 2010The Alabama Supreme Court reversed this Court’s judgment based on its earlier decision in Ex parte Clemons, 55 So.3d 348 (Ala.2007), decided after our earlier affirmance, and remanded the case for this Court to consider the merits of James’s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims and the in forma pauperis claim. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Armstrong v. State
green
2 sentences1996Consequently, the holding in Young v. State , 552 So.2d 879 , 883 (Ala.Cr.App. 1989), disposes of James's claim: " Gagnon v. Scarpelli , supra, and Armstrong v. State , 294 Ala. 100 , 312 So.2d 620 , 622 (1975), require that a probationer be given 'written notice . . . of the claimed violation of probation.' Although defendant was not served with written notice until December 16, four days before the revocation hearing, there is no specific time requirement for notice, only that it 'must be served sufficiently in advance of scheduled court proceedings so that defendant has a reasonable opportu 1996Consequently, the holding in Young v. State , 552 So.2d 879 , 883 (Ala.Cr.App. 1989), disposes of James's claim: " Gagnon v. Scarpelli , supra, and Armstrong v. State , 294 Ala. 100 , 312 So.2d 620 , 622 (1975), require that a probationer be given 'written notice . . . of the claimed violation of probation.' Although defendant was not served with written notice until December 16, four days before the revocation hearing, there is no specific time requirement for notice, only that it 'must be served sufficiently in advance of scheduled court proceedings so that defendant has a reasonable opportu | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Young v. State
green
1 sentence1996Consequently, the holding in Young v. State , 552 So.2d 879 , 883 (Ala.Cr.App. 1989), disposes of James's claim: " Gagnon v. Scarpelli , supra, and Armstrong v. State , 294 Ala. 100 , 312 So.2d 620 , 622 (1975), require that a probationer be given 'written notice . . . of the claimed violation of probation.' Although defendant was not served with written notice until December 16, four days before the revocation hearing, there is no specific time requirement for notice, only that it 'must be served sufficiently in advance of scheduled court proceedings so that defendant has a reasonable opportu | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.