Dobbins v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• procedural bar and timeliness rules do not apply where a Rule 32 petitioner is claiming that he was improperly sentenced under the HFOA
• defendant was convicted under the provisions of the Alabama Uniform Controlled Substances Act (the Act), § 20-2-1 et seq., Ala. Code 1975, and sentenced under the HFOA; remanded for resentencing on the authority of Ex parte Chambers , 522 So.2d 313 (Ala. 1987)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Kennedy v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama· 2005-04-29· cited 15×
• Ex Parte Sanders
  Supreme Court of Alabama· 2001-02-23· cited 7×
• King v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama· 2003-04-25· cited 1×

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Ex Parte Chambers
  Supreme Court of Alabama· 1987-11-06· cited 69×
• Blount v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama· 1990-08-24· cited 46×
• Mitchell v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama· 1989-06-30· cited 7×
• Roberts v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama· 1990-04-27· cited 5×
• Denton v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama· 1990-05-11· cited 3×
• Hall v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama· 1991-04-26· cited 1×