Brooks v. State

I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion holding that this case is factually undistinguishable from Pinkerton v. State, 395 So.2d 1080 (Ala.Cr.App.1980), cert. denied, 395 So.2d 1090 (Ala.1981), and that an actual conflict of interest existed in the present ease. In Pinkerton, defense counsel had previously represented an individual who was convicted of selling narcotics. Counsel helped him negotiate an agreement whereby he would inform on the accused in exchange *1288for the recommendation of a mitigated sentence. This individual was the prime figure in the accused’s subsequent arrest…