You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Knight v. City of Gardendale

Citations: 500 So. 2d 1257; 1986 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 6488Docket: 6 Div. 47

Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama; July 15, 1986; Alabama; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

This case involves an appeal from a conviction for driving under the influence (DUI) under Section 32-5A-191. The defendant was initially found guilty in municipal court and received a $250 fine with a mandatory order to attend DUI school; upon appeal to the circuit court, the conviction and sentence were upheld. The primary issue on appeal centered on the sufficiency of the Alabama Uniform Traffic Ticket and Complaint (UTTC) in providing adequate notice of the charges, with the appellant contending that the citation failed to specify the precise nature of the DUI offense, citing Smith v. State. The appellate court rejected this argument, determining that the UTTC, which expressly referenced the relevant statute, described the prohibited conduct, and included the defendant’s blood alcohol content, met the requisite legal standards for notice. Accordingly, the court affirmed the conviction, holding that the charging instrument was both factually and legally sufficient to inform the accused of the charges, and all concurring judges agreed with the decision.

Legal Issues Addressed

Appellate Review of Traffic Convictions

Application: On appeal, the reviewing court affirmed the conviction and sentence, finding no error in the trial court’s acceptance of the UTTC as sufficient charging documentation.

Reasoning: The court affirmed the lower court's decision, with all judges concurring.

Compliance of UTTC with Legal Standards for Notice

Application: The court determined that a properly filled out UTTC satisfies the requirement to adequately specify the charge to the defendant, rejecting the argument that further specificity is required regarding the type of DUI offense.

Reasoning: However, the court found that the UTTC, when filled out correctly, adequately specified the charge of driving under the influence of alcohol, thus complying with legal standards.

Sufficiency of Charging Instruments in DUI Prosecutions

Application: The court held that an Alabama Uniform Traffic Ticket and Complaint (UTTC) that specifies the statutory violation, provides a description of the conduct, and lists the defendant’s blood alcohol content is sufficient to inform the accused of the charges in a DUI case.

Reasoning: The ticket, an Alabama Uniform Traffic Ticket and Complaint (UTTC), indicated he unlawfully operated a motor vehicle in violation of Section 32-5A-191, with a specific description noting “DRIVING WHILE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL” and a blood alcohol content (BAC) of .21.