Mancil v. State
Mancil v. State
Opinion
The appellant, Jerry Lonzie Mancil, Jr., appeals the trial court's summary denial of his petition for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Rule 32, Ala.R.Crim.P.
The appellant was convicted of rape in the first degree, a violation of §
The appellant raises several issues in his petition, and with the exception of the one addressed below, all could have been raised on direct appeal and are therefore precluded from appellate review under Rule 32.2(a)(5).
The appellant contends that his trial counsel's performance was ineffective because, he *Page 502 says, counsel did not advise the appellant of his right to appeal or of the fact that there was a time limit within which to file notice of appeal. The trial court summarily denied the petition on the state's motion and did not address the appellant's contention concerning his failure to timely file notice of appeal. Appeal to this court has been ruled to be a matter of right. Failure to file a timely appeal to this court is a classic example of ineffective assistance of counsel.
The trial court erred to reversal in summarily denying the appellant's petition. "If the failure to timely file the notice of appeal was through no fault of the appellant's, he is entitled to an out-of-time appeal." Cox v. City of Atmore,
REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.
All the Judges concur.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Jerry Lonzie Mancil, Jr. v. State.
- Cited By
- 13 cases
- Status
- Published