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 2000–2014 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 Washingtongreen2 sentences2011See Ex parte Pettway, 594 So.2d 1196, 1200 (Ala.1991); Ex parte McCall, 594 So.2d 628, 631 (Ala.1991); Ex parte Washington, 448 So.2d 404, 406 (Ala.1984); see also Ex parte Works, 640 So.2d 1056, 1058 (Ala.1994) (opinion as modified on application for rehearing) (‘The purpose of requiring a specific objection to preserve an issue for appellate review is to put the trial judge on notice of the alleged error, giving an opportunity to correct it before the case is submitted to the jury.’).... ”). 2011See Ex parte Pettway, 594 So.2d 1196, 1200 (Ala. 1991); Ex parte McCall, 594 So.2d 628, 631 (Ala.1991); Ex parte Washington, 448 So.2d 404, 406 (Ala.1984); see also Ex parte Works, 640 So.2d 1056, 1058 (Ala. 1994) (opinion as modified on application for rehearing) (`The purpose of requiring a specific objection to preserve an issue for appellate review is to put the trial judge on notice of the alleged error, giving an opportunity to correct it before the case is submitted to the jury.')...."). | 4 | 4 |
Ex Parte McCallgreen2 sentences2011See Ex parte Pettway, 594 So.2d 1196, 1200 (Ala.1991); Ex parte McCall, 594 So.2d 628, 631 (Ala.1991); Ex parte Washington, 448 So.2d 404, 406 (Ala.1984); see also Ex parte Works, 640 So.2d 1056, 1058 (Ala.1994) (opinion as modified on application for rehearing) (‘The purpose of requiring a specific objection to preserve an issue for appellate review is to put the trial judge on notice of the alleged error, giving an opportunity to correct it before the case is submitted to the jury.’).... ”). 2011See Ex parte Pettway, 594 So.2d 1196, 1200 (Ala. 1991); Ex parte McCall, 594 So.2d 628, 631 (Ala.1991); Ex parte Washington, 448 So.2d 404, 406 (Ala.1984); see also Ex parte Works, 640 So.2d 1056, 1058 (Ala. 1994) (opinion as modified on application for rehearing) (`The purpose of requiring a specific objection to preserve an issue for appellate review is to put the trial judge on notice of the alleged error, giving an opportunity to correct it before the case is submitted to the jury.')...."). | 4 | 4 |
Ex Parte Pettwaygreen2 sentences2011See Ex parte Pettway, 594 So.2d 1196, 1200 (Ala.1991); Ex parte McCall, 594 So.2d 628, 631 (Ala.1991); Ex parte Washington, 448 So.2d 404, 406 (Ala.1984); see also Ex parte Works, 640 So.2d 1056, 1058 (Ala.1994) (opinion as modified on application for rehearing) (‘The purpose of requiring a specific objection to preserve an issue for appellate review is to put the trial judge on notice of the alleged error, giving an opportunity to correct it before the case is submitted to the jury.’).... ”). 2011See Ex parte Pettway, 594 So.2d 1196, 1200 (Ala. 1991); Ex parte McCall, 594 So.2d 628, 631 (Ala.1991); Ex parte Washington, 448 So.2d 404, 406 (Ala.1984); see also Ex parte Works, 640 So.2d 1056, 1058 (Ala. 1994) (opinion as modified on application for rehearing) (`The purpose of requiring a specific objection to preserve an issue for appellate review is to put the trial judge on notice of the alleged error, giving an opportunity to correct it before the case is submitted to the jury.')...."). | 4 | 4 |
Finch v. Stategreen2 sentences2011Finch v. State, 715 So.2d 906, 912 (Ala.Crim.App.1997) (‘An objection must be specific enough to put the trial court on notice of any alleged error and provide the court with an opportunity to correct any error if necessary.’).”); Ex parte R.D.W., 773 So.2d 426, 428-29 (Ala.2000) (“These grounds, taken together with R.D.W.’s written request, were sufficiently specific for purposes of preserving this issue for appellate review, because they put the trial court on notice of the substance of the alleged error and thereby provided that court an opportunity to correct it. 2011Finch v. State, 715 So.2d 906, 912 (Ala. Crim.App.1997) (`An objection must be specific enough to put the trial court on notice of any alleged error and provide the court with an opportunity to correct any error if necessary.')."); Ex parte R.D.W., 773 So.2d 426, 428-29 (Ala.2000) ("These grounds, taken together with R.D.W.'s written request, were sufficiently specific for purposes of preserving this issue for appellate review, because they put the trial court on notice of the substance of the alleged error and thereby provided that court an opportunity to correct it. | 4 | 4 |
Ex Parte Worksgreen2 sentences2011See Ex parte Pettway, 594 So.2d 1196, 1200 (Ala.1991); Ex parte McCall, 594 So.2d 628, 631 (Ala.1991); Ex parte Washington, 448 So.2d 404, 406 (Ala.1984); see also Ex parte Works, 640 So.2d 1056, 1058 (Ala.1994) (opinion as modified on application for rehearing) (‘The purpose of requiring a specific objection to preserve an issue for appellate review is to put the trial judge on notice of the alleged error, giving an opportunity to correct it before the case is submitted to the jury.’).... ”). 2011See Ex parte Pettway, 594 So.2d 1196, 1200 (Ala. 1991); Ex parte McCall, 594 So.2d 628, 631 (Ala.1991); Ex parte Washington, 448 So.2d 404, 406 (Ala.1984); see also Ex parte Works, 640 So.2d 1056, 1058 (Ala. 1994) (opinion as modified on application for rehearing) (`The purpose of requiring a specific objection to preserve an issue for appellate review is to put the trial judge on notice of the alleged error, giving an opportunity to correct it before the case is submitted to the jury.')...."). | 4 | 4 |
Ex Parte RDWgreen2 sentences2011Finch v. State, 715 So.2d 906, 912 (Ala.Crim.App.1997) (‘An objection must be specific enough to put the trial court on notice of any alleged error and provide the court with an opportunity to correct any error if necessary.’).”); Ex parte R.D.W., 773 So.2d 426, 428-29 (Ala.2000) (“These grounds, taken together with R.D.W.’s written request, were sufficiently specific for purposes of preserving this issue for appellate review, because they put the trial court on notice of the substance of the alleged error and thereby provided that court an opportunity to correct it. 2011Finch v. State, 715 So.2d 906, 912 (Ala. Crim.App.1997) (`An objection must be specific enough to put the trial court on notice of any alleged error and provide the court with an opportunity to correct any error if necessary.')."); Ex parte R.D.W., 773 So.2d 426, 428-29 (Ala.2000) ("These grounds, taken together with R.D.W.'s written request, were sufficiently specific for purposes of preserving this issue for appellate review, because they put the trial court on notice of the substance of the alleged error and thereby provided that court an opportunity to correct it. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Siegelgreen1 sentence2014It is well settled that, to preserve an issue for appellate review, an argument must “put the trial court on notice of the substance of the alleged error and thereby provide[ ] that court an opportunity to correct it.” Ex parte R.D.W., 778 So.2d 426, 428 (Ala.2000). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
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.