TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Harden v. State

Isiah Harden v. State.

Harden v. State, 396 So. 2d 1076 (Ala. Crim. App. 1980)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · State Appellate Courts
Decided
October 7, 1980
Docket
No. 1 Div. 172
Judges
Bookout
Citations
396 So. 2d 10761980 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 1392

Opinion of the Court — Bookout

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

BOOKOUT, Judge.

Appeal from revocation of probation.

The State has filed with this court a “Motion to Remand” to the trial court “for findings in the form of a written statement by the trial judge as to the evidence relied on and the reasons for revocation of the Appellant’s probation.”

The instant record contains only copies of: (1) the district attorney’s motion to revoke probation; (2) a probation officer’s report; (3) the circuit clerk’s citation to the appellant to appear and show cause why his probation should not be revoked; and (4) the trial judge’s judgment entry revoking probation.

The record does not reveal that the minimum standards of due process were complied with pursuant to Armstrong v. State, 294 Ala. 100 , 312 So.2d 620 (1975) and Borst v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 377 So.2d 3 (1979). The State’s motion is therefore granted, and the cause is hereby remanded to the circuit court with directions to comply with the standards set out in the above cited authorities; more particularly to make a written statement as to the evidence relied upon and reasons for revocation of probation. The circuit court is further directed to file such statement with this court as a supplemental record. •

MOTION GRANTED; REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

All the Judges concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1985: 11989: 119852026peak 1985 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Ex Parte Belcher556 So. 2d 366 (Ala. 1989)
  2. Mathis v. State477 So. 2d 520 (Ala. Crim. App. 1985)

Most recent

  1. Ex Parte Belcher556 So. 2d 366 (Ala. 1989)
  2. Mathis v. State477 So. 2d 520 (Ala. Crim. App. 1985)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Armstrong v. State, 312 So. 2d 620 (Ala. 1975) 367
Borst v. State, 377 So. 2d 3 (Ala. Crim. App. 1979) 6

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list