Ex parte Randall Glass. PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS (In re: Randall Glass v. City of Dothan Personnel Board)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
REL:01/05/07expartejackiesuewoodallv.stateofalabama Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate Courts, 300 Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama 36104-3741 ((334) 242-4621), of any typographical or other errors, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is printed in Southern Reporter. SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA OCTOBER TERM, 2006-2007 _________________________ 1050389 _________________________ Ex parte State of Alabama PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS (In re: State of Alabama v. Jackie Sue Woodall) (Morgan Circuit Court, CC-04-641; Court of Criminal Appeals, CR-04-1599) BOLIN, Justice. 1050389 We granted the State's petition for certiorari review of the Court of Criminal Appeals' decision dismissing the State's pretrial appeal from an order of the trial court granting Jackie Sue Woodall's motion to dismiss count I of the indictment against her. State v. Woodall, [Ms. CR-04-1599, November 23, 2005] So. 2d (Ala. Crim. App. 2005). The issue presented in this case is the same issue addressed in State v. Wilson, [Ms. 1050390, June 23, 2006] So. 2d (Ala. 2006), a case involving a codefendant of Woodall's and the same facts as those here: Whether the State's appeal was timely filed as required by Rule 15.7(b), Ala. R. Crim. P., thereby invoking the original appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Criminal Appeals. In State v. Wilson we held that the notice of appeal, filed three days before the trial court entered its order dismissing count I of Wilson's indictment, was timely. Because the facts presented here are the same as those in State v. Wilson, the rationale in that case controls our decision. Accordingly, the judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded on the authority of State v. Wilson. REVERSED AND REMANDED. Nabers, C.J., and See, Lyons, Harwood, Woodall, Stuart, Smith, and Parker, JJ., concur. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
