Wright v. State
Wright v. State
Dissenting Opinion
dissenting.
I have previously taken the position that the removal of veniremembers on the basis of gender discrimination is prohibited under state law. Daniels v. State, 581 So.2d 536, 540-41 (Ala.Cr.App. 1991) (Bowen, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part), cert. denied, 581 So.2d 541 (Ala. 1991). I continue to adhere to that position, see Murphy v. State, [Ms. CR 90-648, October 11, 1991], 1991 WL 238101 (Ala.Cr.App. 1991), and therefore dissent from that part of the majority opinion
. Reporter of Decisions’ note: The Court of Criminal Appeals released no opinion in this case. Three judges of the court affirmed the judgment of the circuit court by an unpublished “memorandum.”
Opinion of the Court
Appeal from Elmore Circuit Court, Steve Drinkard, Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished memorandum.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.