Ex Parte Montgomery County Commission, 1100026 (Ala. 5-20-2011)

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a statement was not hearsay because it was offered “because of its effect on the hearer”
• holding that a statement introduced for its effect on the listener is not hearsay
• holding that a statement introduced for its effect on the listener is not hearsay
• holding that a statement introduced for its effect on the listener is not hearsay
• concluding that the victim’s statement regarding his sobriety was not probative for the truth of the matter asserted but was admissible to provide evidence of the defendant’s motive for committing the offense
• concluding that the trial court’s error in language on the judgment was inadvertent and “not an attempt to usurp the parole board’s authority to determine how much of the defendant’s prior sentence should be served before commencement of the instant sentence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).