Hawkins v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
CATES, Presiding Judge.
This opinion consolidates our views as to the disposition of three appeals from judgments arising from pleas of guilty.
I
No brief strictly within the purview of Supreme Court Rule 9 has been filed on behalf of the appellant, an indigent. Nevertheless, for the purposes of due process the label and format of counsel’s argument are not controlling. Nickols v. Gagnon, 7 Cir., 454 F.2d 467.
The former Court of Appeals (in discussing compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493) held that “assignments of error” (though not required in our…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Ireland v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1971
- In RE WALCOTT v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1972
- O. D. Nickols v. John R. GagnonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1971
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Cooper v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1973
- Atwell v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1972
- Moffett v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1984
- Caraway v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1974
- Kilgore v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1977
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.