From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Carroll v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama
May 22, 1984
468 So. 2d 185 (Ala. Crim. App. 1984)

Opinion

8 Div. 80.

May 22, 1984.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Lawrence County, Billy C. Burney, J.

Bruce Carroll, pro se.

Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and Thomas R. Allison, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.


Bruce Carroll's petition for a writ of error coram nobis was denied without a hearing by the trial court.

The state concedes, and, from aught that appears in the record, we must agree, that the trial court erred in refusing to hold an evidentiary hearing on appellant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. The other issues raised in appellant's petition are without merit.

The trial court's denial of appellant's petition is, hereby, set aside and the trial court is directed to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine the merits of appellant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. At this hearing the appellant must be present and represented by counsel. See, Ellison v. State, 406 So.2d 439 (Ala.Cr.App. 1981).

REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

All the Judges concur.


Summaries of

Carroll v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama
May 22, 1984
468 So. 2d 185 (Ala. Crim. App. 1984)
Case details for

Carroll v. State

Case Details

Full title:Bruce CARROLL v. STATE

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Date published: May 22, 1984

Citations

468 So. 2d 185 (Ala. Crim. App. 1984)

Citing Cases

Carroll v. State

PATTERSON, Judge. The cause presented by Carroll's appeal of the denial of his petition for writ of error…

Carroll v. State

Upon appeal we remanded the case to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing. Carroll v. State, 468 So.2d…