Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Russell v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Decided September 8, 2017No. CR–13–0513Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWindom, Presiding Judge

*1197I agree with the majority's decision to affirm Joshua Eugene Russell's capital-murder conviction. I, however, respectfully disagree with the majority's interpretation of § 13A-5-49(1), Ala. Code 1975. Specifically, I disagree with the majority's determination that the aggravating circumstance defined in § 13A-5-49(1) requires proof that the defendant was represented by counsel or waived counsel during the proceedings that led to his or her imprisonment for the prior offense. Rather, I believe that the validity of the conviction that resulted in the imprisonment is irrelevant to that…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. AntwineSupreme Court of Missouri · 1987
  2. State v. TrimbleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1982
  3. State v. ThomasSupreme Court of Missouri · 1981
  4. State v. CroneySupreme Court of Missouri · 1968
  5. Ex Parte HarrisSupreme Court of Alabama · 2006

1 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