From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Miller v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama
Jul 28, 1995
673 So. 2d 819 (Ala. Crim. App. 1995)

Opinion

CR-94-0518.

July 28, 1995.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, St. Clair County, Robert Austin, J.

Stansel A. Brown III, Pell City, for Appellant.

Jeff Sessions, Atty. Gen., and Cedric Colvin, Deputy Atty. Gen., for Appellee.


The appellant, Michael Miller, was convicted of unlawful distribution of a controlled substance, § 13A-12-211, Code of Alabama 1975. He was sentenced to two years' imprisonment, and that sentence was suspended. His sentence was enhanced by an additional five years' imprisonment pursuant to § 13A-12-250, Alabama's "schoolyard statute."

Miller did not preserve the issue he raises as to whether the trial court erred in refusing to give his written requested jury instruction on the allegedly permissible inference that could be drawn from the prosecution's alleged failure to call a specific person as a witness or to explain the witness's absence. His objection was, "We are satisfied except for the failure to give the requested charge." The defendant is required to state with particularity the grounds of his objection to the court's refusal to give a requested charge. Morrison v. State, 601 So.2d 165, 178 (Ala.Cr.App. 1992).

In regard to Miller's second issue, i.e., whether he was improperly sentenced under § 13A-12-250, the attorney general concedes that the record fails to show that Miller received the required notice that the prosecution would seek enhancement of Miller's sentence under § 13A-12-250. He asks that this case be remanded for a new sentence hearing so that Miller can be provided with notice and an opportunity to refute the prosecution's evidence that the sale occurred within three miles of a school. He also asks that this case be remanded for compliance with the mandatory "Demand Reduction Assessment Act," § 13A-12-281.

We therefore remand the case. The trial court shall take all necessary action to see that the circuit clerk makes due return to this court at the earliest possible time and within 60 days of the release of this opinion. The return to remand shall include a transcript of the new sentencing proceeding.

REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

Note from the Reporter of Decisions: On November 9, 1995, on return to remand, the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed, without opinion. On January 19, 1996, the court denied rehearing, without opinion.

All Judges concur.


Summaries of

Miller v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama
Jul 28, 1995
673 So. 2d 819 (Ala. Crim. App. 1995)
Case details for

Miller v. State

Case Details

Full title:Michael MILLER v. STATE

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Date published: Jul 28, 1995

Citations

673 So. 2d 819 (Ala. Crim. App. 1995)

Citing Cases

Sanders v. State

The appellant made a general objection to the trial court's refusal and did not state with particularity the…

Knight v. State

A defendant is "required to state with particularity the grounds of his objection to the court's refusal to…