Case ID: so2d_710/html/1361-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "ALMON, Justice. SHORES, Justice", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ex parte William Crocker CULP, Sr., and William Crocker Culp, Jr. (Re William Crocker Culp, Sr., and William Crocker Culp, Jr. v. State).
    1970149.
    Supreme Court of Alabama.
    March 6, 1998.
    Mayer W. Perloff of Reid, Friedman, Per-loff & Ross, P.C., Mobile, for petitioners.
    Bill Pryor, atty. gen., and Susan B. Anderson, deputy atty. gen., for respondent.
   ALMON, Justice.

The petition for the writ of certiorari is denied.

In denying the petition for the writ of certiorari, this Court does not wish to be understood as approving all the language, reasons, or statements of law in the Court of Criminal Appeals’ opinion. Horsley v. Horsley, 291 Ala. 782, 280 So.2d 155 (1973).

WRIT DENIED.

HOOPER, C.J., and KENNEDY, COOK, BUTTS, and SEE, JJ., concur.

MADDOX, SHORES, and HOUSTON, JJ., concur specially, with opinion by SHORES, J.

SHORES, Justice

(concurring specially).

I agree that the petition for the writ of certiorari should be denied. However, I disagree with, and would reject, the following statement in the Court of Criminal Appeals’ opinion on return to remand, which is merely dictum in this case: “[T]he ‘financial resources of the defendant’ can include aid or support from a spouse, even though the restitution order is not binding on a spouse.” Culp v. State, 710 So.2d. 1357, 1360 (Ala.Cr.App.1997).

MADDOX and HOUSTON, JJ., concur.