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.

Myles v. State

Citations: 710 So. 2d 529; 1997 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 288; 1997 WL 593822Docket: CR-96-1006

Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama; September 26, 1997; Alabama; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Leon Myles, the appellant, filed a Rule 32 petition asserting multiple grounds for relief, which he later amended twice. The State opposed the petition, requesting its summary dismissal. After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied the petition but did not provide specific findings of fact for all material issues raised, violating Rule 32.9(d) of the Alabama Rules of Criminal Procedure. Consequently, the case is remanded to the trial court to address the unresolved issues in the petition. The trial court is instructed to determine whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary for these remaining allegations and to provide written findings regarding them. The circuit clerk must ensure a prompt return of the case to this court within 42 days, including any hearing transcripts and legible copies of the appellant's petitions. All judges concur with the remand and instructions.

Legal Issues Addressed

Procedural Compliance for Remand

Application: The circuit clerk is responsible for ensuring the prompt return of the case to the appellate court within 42 days, including necessary documentation.

Reasoning: The circuit clerk must ensure a prompt return of the case to this court within 42 days, including any hearing transcripts and legible copies of the appellant's petitions.

Remand for Further Proceedings

Application: The case is remanded to the trial court to address unresolved issues and to determine whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary, with instructions to provide written findings.

Reasoning: Consequently, the case is remanded to the trial court to address the unresolved issues in the petition. The trial court is instructed to determine whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary for these remaining allegations and to provide written findings regarding them.

Requirement for Specific Findings under Rule 32.9(d)

Application: The trial court violated Rule 32.9(d) by failing to provide specific findings of fact on all material issues raised in the appellant's petition.

Reasoning: After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied the petition but did not provide specific findings of fact for all material issues raised, violating Rule 32.9(d) of the Alabama Rules of Criminal Procedure.