Legal Opinion

Ex Parte Pruitt

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided July 20, 1984No. 83-843PublishedCited by 47 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

We deny the writ because defendant has failed to comply with Rule 39, A.R.A.P., in presenting additional facts not contained in the opinion of the Court of Criminal Appeals. In denying the writ, we are not to be understood as approving the holding of the Court of Criminal Appeals that "where a defendant denies the event in toto, the court is not obliged to charge on a lesser included offense." 457 So.2d 454 (Ala.Crim.App. 1979). The accused is entitled to have the trial court charge on lesser included offenses where there is a reasonable theory from the evidence supporting defendant's…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Chavers v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1978
  2. Pruitt v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1984

3Cited by47 opinions

  1. Whitehead v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1999
  2. Connolly v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1985
  3. Hutcherson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1994
  4. Fisher v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1991
  5. Wright v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1985

42 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