Legal Opinion

Ex Parte Bell

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided July 27, 2007No. 1060926Published

1Concurrence 1

Although I concur in the result reached by the main opinion, I cannot join the main opinion insofar as it states that Exparte Seymour, 946 So.2d 536 (Ala. 2006); and Ex parteCulbreth, 966 So.2d 910 (Ala. 2006), implicitly overruledIvey v. State, 821 So.2d 937 (Ala. 2001), to the extentIvey stated that venue in a criminal case was jurisdictional. I would distinguish, rather than overrule,Ivey because Ivey does not deal at all with waiver. The defendant in Ivey moved for a judgment of acquittal in the trial court based on improper venue, thereby preserving the issue for appellate review.

I…

Also in this document: Concurrence · Smith.

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Ex Parte SeymourSupreme Court of Alabama · 2006
  2. Woodson v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1910
  3. Ivey v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 2001
  4. United States v. CallahanDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1969
  5. Ex Parte CulbrethSupreme Court of Alabama · 2006

5 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