Supreme Court of Alabama, 1972

In RE WALCOTT v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama · Decided April 6, 1972 · No. 6 Div. 934 · Heflin, Lawson, Merrill, Harwood, Maddox

263 So. 2d 178; 288 Ala. 546; 1972 Ala. LEXIS 1265 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

28 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.

Twyman v. State (Ala. 1974)
Boglin v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2002)
State v. Reaves (Iowa 1977)
Woods v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1976)
Twyman v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1973)
Hawkins v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1972)
Brown v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1997)
Lasner v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1996)
Brewster v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1993)
Humber v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1985)
Rhodes v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1978)
Davis v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1977)
Cornelius v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1975)
Cooper v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1973)
Johnson v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1973)
Phillips v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1973)
Allen v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1973)
Askew v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1973)
Miles v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1973)
Sullen v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1973)
Craft v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1972)
Powers v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1972)
Scoggins v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1972)
Priest v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1972)
Congo v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1972)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

HEFLIN, Chief Justice.

Petition of the State of Alabama for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals to review and revise the judgment of remandment in Walcott v. State of Alabama, 48 Ala.App. -, 263 So.2d 177 (1971), is denied.

The petitioner (State of Alabama) contends since the trial court’s judgment en-

*547 try recited that the plea of guilty was free, voluntary and intelligently made, the requirements of Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274, are met. Therefore, the case should not have been remanded. This Court agrees with the rule of the Court of Criminal Appeals that the record must affirmatively show the colloquy between the court and the defendant wherein the defendant is shown to have full understanding of what the plea of guilty connotes and its consequences. See Cooper v. State, 47 Ala.App. 178, 252 So.2d 104, cert. denied, 287 Ala. 728, 252 So.2d 108. In denying the writ of certiorari in Cooper v. State, supra, this Court made an expression that this Court did not wish to be understood as approving or disapproving all of the language contained in the opinion of that case in the Court of Criminal Appeals. However, the questionable language to which such referred is not pertinent to the issue of whether the record must contain the colloquy between the court and the defendant.

Writ denied.

LAWSON, MERRILL, HARWOOD and MADDOX, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.