Supreme Court of Alabama, 1984

Ex Parte Pruitt

Supreme Court of Alabama · Decided July 20, 1984 · Per Curiam

457 So. 2d 456 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

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

Ware v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1990)
Howard v. State (Ala. 2011)
Warren v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2006)
Ex Parte Dunaway (Ala. 1999)
Boyd v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1997)
Breckenridge v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1993)
Ex Parte Pettiway (Ala. 1988)
Ex Parte Daniels (Ala. 1986)
Pack v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1984)
Ex Parte Curry (Ala. 1984)
Jordaan Stanly Creque v. State of Alabama (Ala. Crim. App. 2026)
Smith v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2017)
Morton v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2013)
Sean Travis Howard v. State of Alabama. (Ala. Crim. App. 2009)
Adams v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2003)
Butler v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2000)
Whitehead v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1999)
Ex Parte TDT (Ala. 1999)
Minor v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1999)
Carroll v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1999)
Jackson v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1999)
T.D.T. v. State (Ala. 1999)
Carroll v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1999)
Smith v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1998)
Dunaway v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1998)

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

We deny the writ because defendant has failed to comply with Rule 39, A.R.A.P., in presenting additional facts not contained in the opinion of the Court of Criminal Appeals. In denying the writ, we are not to be understood as approving the holding of the Court of Criminal Appeals that "where a defendant denies the event in toto, the court is not obliged to charge on a lesser included offense." 457 So.2d 454 (Ala.Crim.App. 1979). The accused is entitled to have the trial court charge on lesser included offenses where there is a reasonable theory from the evidence supporting defendant's position, regardless of whether the State or defendant offers the evidence. SeeChavers v. State, 361 So.2d 1106, 1107 (Ala. 1978). The Court of Criminal Appeals reached the correct result in Williams, a case "where the only reasonable conclusion from the evidence is that the defendant is guilty of robbery [the greater offense] or no crime at all." 377 So.2d at 637. If, however, the defendant denies the charge but the evidence presented by the State suggests a reasonable theory supporting a charge on a lesser offense, the trial court is obliged to give a charge on the lesser offense when requested.

WRIT DENIED.

TORBERT, C.J., and FAULKNER, ALMON, EMBRY and ADAMS, JJ., concur.

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