Brand v. State

I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion affirming the trial court’s dismissal of Brand’s Rule 32, Ala. R.Crim. P., petition. The issue presented by this appeal— whether imposition of consecutive split sentences in the same sentencing hearing results in an illegal sentence — is one of first impression in Alabama.

The majority, without citing any authority allowing such action, construes the consecutive sentences ordered by the trial court into a hybrid consecutive and concurrent amalgam, containing some of the characteristics of each type of sentence, resulting in a new sentence that…