Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Fuller v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Decided December 18, 2015No. CR-14-0368Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partKellum, Judge

I concur with Parts I and III of the majority opinion. However, I dissent from Part II of the opinion because I believe that Paudriciquez Martez Fuller was entitled to a jury instruction on heat-of-passion (provocation) manslaughter as a less*1221er-included offense of the capital-murder charge and that the trial court’s failure to so instruct constituted reversible error.

“The ‘safer’ practice is to charge upon all degrees of homicide: ‘(I)t is much the safer rule to charge upon all the degrees of homicide included in the indictment, when a party is on trial for murder, unless it is perfectly…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Phelps v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1983
  2. Pierson v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1892
  3. Williams v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1948
  4. Ex Parte McGriffSupreme Court of Alabama · 2005
  5. Reeves v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1914

9 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