Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Timothy John WOOTEN v. STATE.
On March 18, 1999, the appellant, Timothy John Wooten, pled guilty to first-degree rape and first-degree sodomy, and the trial court sentenced him to serve concurrent terms of twenty years in prison. He did not appeal his convictions. On May 2, 2000, the appellant filed a Rule 32 petition, challenging his convictions. In his petition, he alleged that his trial counsel had rendered ineffective assistance in several instances. Before the State could respond, the circuit court summarily denied his petition. This appeal followed.
The appellant argues that the circuit court erroneously summarily denied his petition. In its order denying the petition, the circuit court did not make specific findings of fact regarding each ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim the appellant raised. Additionally, in its response, which was filed after the circuit court had denied the petition, the State did not specifically address or refute each of the ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims the appellant raised. The appellant's allegations that his trial counsel did not correctly advise him of the consequences of entering his guilty pleas may be meritorious. See Brown v. State, 727 So.2d 885 (Ala.Crim.App.1998); Carroll v. State, 706 So.2d 815 (Ala.Crim.App.1997). Accordingly, we remand this case to the circuit court with instructions that that court make specific, written findings of fact regarding each of the appellant's ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims. On remand, the circuit court may require the State to respond specifically to the appellant's ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims and/or may conduct an evidentiary hearing on those claims. The circuit 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 42 days after the release of this opinion. The return to remand shall include the circuit court's specific, written findings of fact and, if applicable, the State's response and a transcript of the evidentiary hearing.
REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.*
FOOTNOTES
FOOTNOTE. Note from the reporter of decisions: On March 23, 2001, on return to remand, the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed, without opinion.
BASCHAB, Judge.
LONG, P.J., and McMILLAN, COBB, and FRY, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: CR-99-1792.
Decided: August 25, 2000
Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)