Legal Opinion

Hinton v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 29, 1994No. 1921590PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

This Court granted the State's petition for a writ of certiorari to review the same legal question presented inCantu v. State, 660 So.2d 1026 (Ala. 1994), and in Parish v.State, 660 So.2d 231 (Ala. 1994): If a trial judge fails to advise a defendant of the maximum and minimum sentence he or she could receive if he or she pleaded guilty, is the sentence given by the trial judge void? In Cantu and in Parish, this Court held that the sentence was not void. We reach the same result in this case. Consequently, the holding by the Court of Criminal Appeals to the contrary, 668 So.2d 48, is reversed…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Cantu v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1994
  2. Parish v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1994
  3. Hinton v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1993

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Anderson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1995
  2. Ex Parte StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1995
  3. Heard v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1996
  4. Heard v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1996
  5. Hinton v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1994

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API