Okafor v. State

DONALDSON, Judge,

concurring in part and dissenting in part in the rationale and dissenting from the judgment.

I agree with the analysis and conclusion of the main opinion insofar as it holds that this court has subject-matter jurisdiction over Christopher' Okafor’s appeal. Because my review of the evidence leads me to conclude that Okafor failed to present substantial evidence to overcome the motion for a summary judgment filed by the State of Alabama (“the State”), I would affirm the judgment of the Madison Circuit Court (“the trial court”). Therefore, I respectfully dissent.

Okafor contends…