Legal Opinion

Tucker v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided June 18, 1963No. 3 Div. 147PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CATES, Judge.

This is an appeal on the record proper from a judgment based on a verdict of guilty on an indictment for grand larceny of an automobile.

On arraignment it affirmatively appears that the defendant was without counsel. No waiver appears. Under Hamilton v. State, 273 Ala. 504, 142 So.2d 868, Hamilton v. Alabama, 368 U.S. 52, 82 S.Ct. 157, 7 L.Ed.2d 114, and Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335, 83 S.Ct. 792, 9 L.Ed.2d 799 *175(March 15, 1963), we consider the judgment below is required to be reversed and the cause there remanded for a new trial.

Reversed and remanded.

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Hamilton v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  3. Ex Parte Hamilton v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1962

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Frank M. Williams v. State of AlabamaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1965
  2. Irvin v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1967
  3. Mayola v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1976
  4. Dillard v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1968
  5. Tucker v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1963

2 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