From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Diaz v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama
Jul 26, 1985
474 So. 2d 173 (Ala. 1985)

Opinion

No. 84-693.

July 26, 1985.

Certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals (5 Div. 972).

Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and Martha Gail Ingram, Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.

Charles R. Gaddy, Millbrook, for respondent.


WRIT DENIED.

FAULKNER, JONES, ALMON, and ADAMS, JJ., concur.

TORBERT, C.J., concurs specially.


I agree that the writ should be denied. However, I wish to point out that I do not agree with the Court of Criminal Appeals' conclusion that the factual statement of the disciplinary court is inadequate. I agree with the Court of Criminal Appeals' conclusion, 474 So.2d 171, that petitioner was entitled to a hearing in circuit court on the merits of his allegations only because he was allegedly denied an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses at the disciplinary hearing.


Summaries of

Diaz v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama
Jul 26, 1985
474 So. 2d 173 (Ala. 1985)
Case details for

Diaz v. State

Case Details

Full title:Ex parte State of Alabama (Re Ignacio DIAZ v. STATE of Alabama)

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Jul 26, 1985

Citations

474 So. 2d 173 (Ala. 1985)

Citing Cases

Hudson v. State

"In light of the allegations herein made and the failure to furnish a proper statement showing the reasons as…

Brown v. State

As indicated, Wolff does not require the tape recording of disciplinary actions. Nor is the tape recording of…