Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Benefield v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided September 30, 2005No. 1041354Published

1ConcurrenceStuart, Justice

Based on the record before us, I agree with the majority that Benefield presented a jurisdictional claim that warrants further review. Here, Benefield pleaded a claim that appears to involve simultaneous convictions for both the charged offense and a lesser-included offense. Therefore, the jurisdiction of the trial court is at issue; the claim is not subject to the limitations period of Rule 32.2(c), Ala. R.Crim. P.; and the merits of the claim must be addressed.

Here, it appears that the State in its response to Benefield’s petition implicitly recognized the jurisdictional nature of…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Ex Parte ZiglarSupreme Court of Alabama · 1995
  2. Simmons v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 2000
  3. Loggins v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1999
  4. Rolling v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1995
  5. Ex Parte StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1992

26 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