Court Opinion

ID: 9676170
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 05:16:47.742393+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:45.005843
License: Public Domain

CATES, Presiding Judge.
Four cases of selling amphetamine sulphate, one of possession thereof: sentence, in each case two years in the penitentiary. No words of concurrency of the sentences appear in the judgment entries. Therefore, the sentences are consecutive. Crook v. State, 44 Ala.App. 83, 203 So.2d 138; Eldridge v. State, 44 Ala.App. 327, 208 So.2d 236; Isbell v. State, 48 Ala.App. 152, 262 So.2d 639.
The instant records are in nowise distinguishable from that found in Twyman v. State, 53 Ala.App. 351, 300 So.2d 121, reversed 293 Ala. 75, 300 So.2d 124. In addition, there is a court reporter’s transcript of the colloquy between the judge and the prisoner. While this colloquy does not allude to the range of punishment, the Ireland form 1 used in the court below (which is signed and filed of record there) does show that appellant was apprised of what the minimum and maximum sentences and fines are. We consider that no problem arises under Carter v. State, 291 Ala. 83, 277 So.2d 896.
Accordingly, on authority of Twyman, supra, the judgments below are
Affirmed.

. See Ireland v. State, 47 Ala.App. 65, 250 So.2d 602.