Legal Opinion
McDaniel v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama
Decided March 31, 2000No. CR-98-2488PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Perry Shae McDaniel appeals from the order of the trial court revoking his probation. McDaniel contends that the trial court's revocation order is deficient because, he says, it fails to adequately specify the evidence the court relied upon and the reasons for revoking his probation as required by Armstrong v.State, 294 Ala. 100, 312 So.2d 620 (1975).
"`In Wyatt v. State, 608 So.2d 762, 763 (Ala. 1992), the Alabama Supreme Court held that "Armstrong v. State [, 294 Ala. 100, 312 So.2d 620 (1975),] requires a written order setting forth the evidence relied upon and the reason for the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Armstrong v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1975
- Ex Parte StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1992
- Martin v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1996
- Davidson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1996
- Ex parte C. V.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1997
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Holden v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 2001
- Williams v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 2004
- Davis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 2003