From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ex Parte Payne

Supreme Court of Alabama
Dec 15, 2000
791 So. 2d 408 (Ala. 2000)

Opinion

No. 1991506.

Decided December 15, 2000.

Appeal from Cullman Circuit Court, CC-92-179.60; Court of Criminal Appeals, CR-97-2503.

Bruce D. Nestor of Tindal, Erdahl, Godard Nestor; Iowa City, Iowa; and Ellen Wiesner of Equal Justice Initiative of Alabama, Montgomery, for petitioner.

Bill Pryor, atty. gen., and Kathryn D. Anderson, asst. atty. gen., for respondent.


The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied. In denying the petition for the writ of certiorari, this court does not wish to be understood as approving the discussion or the statements of law concerning the petitioner's Brady violation claim in the Court of Criminal Appeals' opinion. Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). See Ex parte Pierce [Ms. 1981270, September 1, 2000] ___ So.2d ___ (Ala. 2000) (holding that a constitutional violation claim under Rule 32.1(a), Ala.R.Crim.P., need not meet the requirements of a "newly discovered" evidence claim under Rule 32.1(e), Ala.R.Crim.P.).

WRIT DENIED.

Hooper, C.J., and Cook and Lyons, JJ., concur.

Maddox, J., concurs in the result.


Summaries of

Ex Parte Payne

Supreme Court of Alabama
Dec 15, 2000
791 So. 2d 408 (Ala. 2000)
Case details for

Ex Parte Payne

Case Details

Full title:Ex parte Max Landon Payne. (In re: Max Landon Payne v. State)

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Dec 15, 2000

Citations

791 So. 2d 408 (Ala. 2000)

Citing Cases

Payne v. Allen

The Alabama Supreme Court denied certiorari. Ex parte Payne, 791 So.2d 408 (Ala. 2000). J. Federal Habeas…

Miller v. State

In order to establish that his appellate counsel were ineffective in the manner in which they presented the…