Supreme Court of Alabama, 1976

Skelton v. City of Birmingham

Supreme Court of Alabama · Decided October 29, 1976 · Bloodworth, Heflin, Jones, Almon, Embry

342 So. 2d 937; 1976 Ala. LEXIS 1511 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

22 later published cases cite this decision.

Miller v. City of Fairhope (Ala. Crim. App. 2003)
Owens v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2002)
TW v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1995)
T.W. v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1995)
Shinault v. City of Huntsville (Ala. Crim. App. 1991)
Ruffino v. City of Hoover (United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama 2012)
C.P. v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2007)
Fallin v. City of Huntsville (Ala. Crim. App. 2003)
HNP v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2003)
H.N.P. v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2003)
Walker v. Briley (United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama 2001)
South v. City of Mountain Brook (Ala. Crim. App. 1996)
Smith v. City of Anniston (Ala. Crim. App. 1995)
RIT v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1995)
R.I.T. v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1995)
Beech v. City of Mobile (United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama 1994)
BES v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1993)
B.E.S. v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1993)
Robinson v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1992)
LMAW v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1992)
L.M.A.W. v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1992)
Swann v. City of Huntsville (Ala. Crim. App. 1984)

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 of the Court

BLOODWORTH, Justice.

Petition of James Skelton for certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that court in Skelton v. City of Birmingham, Ala.Cr.App., 342 So.2d 933 [1976].

Upon a consideration of the facts set out in the Court of Criminal Appeals’ decision, we are of the opinion that the judgment of that court should be corrected to read “REVERSED AND RENDERED” instead of “REVERSED AND REMANDED.”

This case was fully briefed in the Court of Criminal Appeals. No purpose would be served by requiring the parties to submit briefs again. Thus, the provisions of all applicable rules, specifically Rule 39(f) and (g), ARAP (permitting briefs to be filed and oral argument to be had' after petitions for writs of certiorari are granted), are suspended under the provisions of Rule 2(b), ARAP. Pendleton v. State, 295 Ala. 327, 329 So.2d 144 (1976).

The petition for the writ of certiorari is granted and this cause remanded to the Court of Criminal Appeals so that it may conform its judgment to this opinion. In re Gentry (Ex parte Charles Herbert Gentry), Ala., 333 So.2d 157 (1976); Pendleton v. State, supra.

WRIT GRANTED.

RULES SUSPENDED.

CAUSE REMANDED TO COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS TO CORRECT JUDGMENT.

HEFLIN, C. J., and JONES, ALMON and EMBRY, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.