Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ex Parte Patterson

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Decided March 18, 2011No. CR-10-0334Published

1DissentWindom, Judge

I respectfully disagree with the majority’s determination that Rodney Wayne Patterson is entitled to the reinstatement of his original bail. As discussed in detail below, I do not believe that Patterson’s acquittal of the charge that formed the basis of his bail revocation establishes a lack of probable cause that he committed the new offense and, thus, forfeited his right to bail. See Rule 7.5(b), Ala. R.Crim. P. Therefore, I must respectfully dissent.

“The Constitution of the State of Alabama provides ‘[t]hat all persons shall, before conviction, be bailable by sufficient sureties, except…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Spinelli v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  3. Ex Parte BoydSupreme Court of Alabama · 1989
  4. Loper v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1985
  5. Stone v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1986

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API