Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 2007–2022 1 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 Robeygreen2 sentences2010See, e.g., Ex parte Robey, 920 So.2d 1069, 1071-72 (Ala.2004) (holding that because multiple punishments for the same offense constitute a sentence that exceeds the maximum allowed by law and an illegal sentence affects the trial court's jurisdiction, `Robey is not barred from asserting in this successive Rule 32 petition the violation of his double-jeopardy rights'); Ex parte Sanders, 792 So.2d 1087, 1091 (Ala.2001) (`"[w]nether a sentence is excessive . . . is a jurisdictional issue" that is not precluded by the limitations period of Rule 32, by the rule against successive petitions, or by R 2010See, e.g., Ex parte Robey, 920 So.2d 1069, 1071-72 (Ala.2004) (holding that because multiple punishments for the same offense constitute a sentence that exceeds the maximum allowed by law and an illegal sentence affects the trial court’s jurisdiction, ‘Robey is not barred from asserting in this successive Rule 32 petition the violation of his double-jeopardy rights’); Ex parte Sanders, 792 So.2d 1087, 1091 (Ala.2001) (‘ “[wjhether a sentence is excessive ... is a jurisdictional issue” that is not precluded by the limitations period of Rule 32, by the rule against successive petitions, or by Ru | 3 | 3 |
Ex Parte Sandersgreen2 sentences2010See, e.g., Ex parte Robey, 920 So.2d 1069, 1071-72 (Ala.2004) (holding that because multiple punishments for the same offense constitute a sentence that exceeds the maximum allowed by law and an illegal sentence affects the trial court's jurisdiction, `Robey is not barred from asserting in this successive Rule 32 petition the violation of his double-jeopardy rights'); Ex parte Sanders, 792 So.2d 1087, 1091 (Ala.2001) (`"[w]nether a sentence is excessive . . . is a jurisdictional issue" that is not precluded by the limitations period of Rule 32, by the rule against successive petitions, or by R 2010See, e.g., Ex parte Robey, 920 So.2d 1069, 1071-72 (Ala.2004) (holding that because multiple punishments for the same offense constitute a sentence that exceeds the maximum allowed by law and an illegal sentence affects the trial court’s jurisdiction, ‘Robey is not barred from asserting in this successive Rule 32 petition the violation of his double-jeopardy rights’); Ex parte Sanders, 792 So.2d 1087, 1091 (Ala.2001) (‘ “[wjhether a sentence is excessive ... is a jurisdictional issue” that is not precluded by the limitations period of Rule 32, by the rule against successive petitions, or by Ru | 3 | 3 |
Ex Parte Trawickgreen2 sentences2022See also Ex parte Trawick, 972 So. 2d 782, 783 (Ala. 2007)("Trawick's claim that his sentence is illegal under the HFOA presents a jurisdictional claim."). 2016See also Ex parte Trawick, 972 So.2d 782, 783 (Ala.2007) (“Traw-ick’s claim that his sentence is illegal under the HFOA presents a jurisdictional claim.”). | 2 | 3 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ex Parte Thomas
green
1 sentence2022Further, "[t]he Alabama Supreme Court in Ex parte Thomas, 435 So. 2d 1324 (Ala. 1982) held that: " '... [A] prior youthful offender adjudication is properly considered in determining the sentence to be imposed within the statutory range for a later crime for which the defendant has been convicted. | 1 | 2022–2022 |