Legal Opinion

Richardson v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Decided October 12, 1990No. CR 89-948PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TAYLOR, Presiding Judge.

Cornelius Richardson appeals from the denial of his petition filed pursuant to Rule 20, Ala.R.Crim.P.Temp. That petition alleged that Richardson’s trial counsel was ineffective. The State filed a response to the petition, stating the following:

“The Petition is not sufficiently specific, as required by Rule 20.6(b) of the Temporary Rules of Criminal Procedure, is precluded by Rule 20.2 of said rules; and is due to be denied on grounds of preclusion as provided by Rule 20.2. Further, that no grounds exist which would entitle the Petitioner to relief under Rule 20,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Ex Parte RiceSupreme Court of Alabama · 1990

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Richardson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1991
  2. Davis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 2006
  3. Davis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 2006
  4. Richardson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1991

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API