J.C.C. v. State

I believe that J.C.C.’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence has been preserved for appellate review. Therefore, I respectfully dissent for the same reasons Judge Shaw expressed in his dissent. Additionally, I am persuaded by J.C.C.’s argument on application for rehearing that the cases relied upon by the State— N.L.H. v. State, 873 So.2d 258, 259-60 (Ala.Crim.App.2003), M.B. v. State, 630 So.2d 490, 491 (Ala.Crim.App.1993), and Ex parte Vaughn, 495 So.2d 83 (Ala.1986) — are distinguishable in that “each of those cases the trial court conducted hearings on disputed facts, not…