Ex Parte Henderson
Cases that cite this one
134 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- McNair v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1992)
- Whitehead v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1999)
- DeBruce v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1993)
- Taylor v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2000)
- Perkins v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1999)
- Burgess v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1998)
- Weaver v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1995)
- Taylor v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1994)
- Harris v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1992)
- McGowan v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2005)
- Perkins v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2004)
- Clark v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2003)
- Lewis v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2003)
- Ex Parte Perkins (Ala. 2002)
- Jackson v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2000)
- Smith v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2000)
- Ferguson v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2000)
- Reeves v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2000)
- Jackson v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2000)
- Ferguson v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2000)
- Freeman v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1999)
- Melson v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1999)
- Sneed v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1999)
- Hardy v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1999)
- Pressley v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1999)
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
Jerry Paul Henderson was convicted by a Talladega County jury of capital murder (Code of Alabama 1975, §
In his petition to this Court, Henderson raises the same 22 issues that he raised before the Court of Criminal Appeals. The opinion released by the Court of Criminal *Page 306 Appeals provides a thorough treatment of each issue raised by Henderson. Henderson v. State, supra.
Our review of a death penalty case allows us to address any plain error or defect found in the proceeding under review, even if the error was not brought to the attention of the trial court. Rule 45A, A.R.App.P. " ' "Plain error" only arises if the error is so obvious that the failure to notice it would seriously affect the fairness or integrity of the judicial proceedings.' " Ex parte Womack,
We have thoroughly reviewed the record before us for error regarding the issues raised by Henderson as well as for plain error not raised. Out of an abundance of caution, we have given special consideration to the issues involving the spousal privilege, self-defense, an alleged violation of Brady v.Maryland,
Therefore, the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals is due to be, and it is hereby, affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
HORNSBY, C.J., and MADDOX, ALMON, SHORES, ADAMS, HOUSTON, KENNEDY and INGRAM, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.