Court Opinion

ID: 7627715
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-29 18:13:41.160188+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:40:24.135488
License: Public Domain

Fernando Demandes Small filed a petition styled as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. While the trial court properly treated the petition as a post-conviction proceeding under Rule 32, A.R.Cr.P., it did not give the appellant the opportunity to file a petition in the form required by 32.6(a), A.R.Crim.P. Therefore, this case is remanded to the Mobile Circuit Court with directions that the appellant's petition be returned to him so that he can have the opportunity to file a proper Rule 32 petition as required by Rule 32.6, A.R.Crim.P. Drayton v.State, 600 So.2d 1088 (Ala.Crim.App. 1992); Nickerson v.State, 597 So.2d 762 (Ala.Crim.App. 1992).
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
All Judges concur.