Ex parte Mario Dewayne Acoff. PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS (In re: Mario Dewayne Acoff v. State of Alabama)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 12/18/2009 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o formal r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA OCTOBER TERM, 2009-2010 1081306 Ex p a r t e M a r i o Dewayne Acoff PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS (In r e : Mario Dewayne Acoff v. S t a t e o f Alabama) (Jefferson LYONS, C i r c u i t C o u r t , Bessemer D i v i s i o n , CC-03-828.60; C o u r t o f C r i m i n a l A p p e a l s , CR-08-0873) Justice. Mario Dewayne A c o f f first-degree robbery; was c o n v i c t e d i n S e p t e m b e r 2004 o f he was s e n t e n c e d t o 22 y e a r s i n prison. 1081306 On d i r e c t appeal, conviction 926 ( A l a . Crim. his petition opinion. Ex p a r t e On Acoff, December 10, alleging the judgment b e c a u s e , he s a i d , jury venire or i t had f a i l e d the p e t i t court Court Criminal Appeals Rule 32 p e t i t i o n , (No. CR-08-0873, App. 2009) certiorari In May (table). review. i t s unpublished Appeals stated: refutes h i s contention" discretion without then granted (table). for P., to i n h i s case the State Acoff's the ___ order the t r i a l i n dismissing h i sp e t i t i o n , Acoff a n d we of provided court The v. State ( A l a . Crim. this the Court a dismissing So. 3d ___ petitioned filed petition. an o p i n i o n . of the record 2 an jurisdiction hispetition, that without 3 2 , A l a . R. C r i m . After memorandum, "A p o r t i o n Court petition the sentence affirmed 22, 2009), We This 2005) a without dismissed Acoff v. S t a t e , t o s w e a r i n t h e members o f t h e jury. the t r i a l Acoff's was or t o impose (Ala. filed to Rule court Acoff certiorari, Acoff pursuant response, of of affirmed h i s (table). 946 S o . 2 d 547 the t r i a l that writ 2008, relief an o p i n i o n . App. 2005) for a postconviction render of C r i m i n a l Appeals and s e n t e n c e , w i t h o u t So. 2d 1085 denied the Court Court f o r affirm. Criminal by Acoff exceeded i t s n o t i n g t h a t an e n t r y on 1081306 the case-action "'...[j]ury duly summary.) Acoff's selected The C o u r t allegation therefore, Acoff summary dated August and sworn.'" of Criminal is clearly s u m m a r y d i s m i s s a l was presented the following 30, 2004, states: (Quoting case action concluded: "Here, Appeals refuted by the record; appropriate." facts i n his petition for certiorari: " [ A c o f f ] s u b m i t s t h a t t h e C a s e A c t i o n Summary Sheet, [ P e t i t i o n e r ' s E x h i b i t - A , (C. 2 5 ) ] , t e n d s t o r e f l e c t t h a t t h e p e t i t j u r y was d u l y s e l e c t e d a n d sworn [on] A u g u s t 30, 2 004; however, the Court Reporter's Transcript, (C. 29-30), of those p r o c e e d i n g s a f f i r m a t i v e l y r e f l e c t t h a t [on] t h a t d a y (August 30, 2 0 0 4 ) , a t 1:45PM, the jury venire e n t e r e d t h e courtroom and v o i r d i r e e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e v e n i r e was c o n d u c t e d a n d t h e j u r y was s e l e c t e d a n d s e a t e d . (C. 2 8 - 2 9 ) "In fact, the Reporter's Transcript, [ P e t i t i o n e r ' s E x h i b i t - B , (C. 2 9 - 3 0 ) ] , r e f l e c t s t h a t on that day, August 30, 2004, the T r i a l Court addressed the [petit] j u r y i n the f o l l o w i n g : "'Your [ s i c ] are the j u r y that's going to be hearing this case; a l l right? I a p p r e c i a t e your p a t i e n c e and a t t e n t i v e n e s s , your w i l l i n g n e s s t o serve. I am g o i n g t o g i v e y o u s o r t o f a t h u m b n a i l s k e t c h o f how we a r e g o i n g t o p r o c e e d t o m o r r o w , a n d t h e n I am g o i n g t o e x c u s e y o u f o r t h e d a y a s w e l l . So, f i r s t t h i n g i n [ t ] h e | m o r n i n g ] , I w i l l swear you a l l i n as j u r o r s ; okay? After that, both sides will have an opportunity t o make w h a t we c a l l opening s t a t e m e n t s . ' (R. 1 0 - 1 1 ) 3 1081306 "Moreover, the Reporter's Transcript, [ P e t i t i o n e r ' s E x h i b i t - B , (C. 3 2 - 3 3 ) ] , r e f l e c t s t h a t on t h e f o l l o w i n g m o r n i n g , A u g u s t 3 1 , 2 0 0 4 , t h e T r i a l Court, again, failed to administer the oath she commented on the previous evening: instead, at 10:41AM, t h e T r i a l C o u r t i n f o r m e d t h e j u r y t h a t t h e proceedings would begin with opening statements. The T r i a l C o u r t a d d r e s s e d t h e j u r y i n t h e f o l l o w i n g : "'As I explained p r o c e d u r a l l y , the f i r s t do t h i s m o r n i n g i s h a v e The State goes firs defendant goes; okay?' Acoff's Verified Statement to yesterday, t h i n g t h a t we w o u l d opening statements. t, and then the [R. 5 5 - 5 6 ] " of Facts, pp. 1-2 (emphasis Acoff's). Acoff that the contended quoted in his portion of petition the unpublished is a conflict Court memorandum c o n f l i c t s where t h e r e summary ("a minute transcript, the resolve discrepancy the the 30 a c t i o n m u s t be i n the t r a n s c r i p t from August sworn 31 the on and 30 the next day shows t h e first proceeding the fact that the of certiorari Criminal authority entry and the on record. He r e c i t e s that as the the with Appeals' holding court reporter's trial court argues that the jurors will minute entry sworn. of to because be August opening statements, the that case-action t r a n s c r i p t from j u r o r s were 4 review the remanded f o r the because transcript is in conflict reciting with b e t w e e n an entry") for then August Because of 1081306 that conflict, conducted an Acoff's that the taken this he evidentiary j u r y was sworn But Court held in that is sufficient jury was 442, 445, record the properly 183 So. in order Gardner allow sworn. 428, discloses that v. See 430 the (1938), j u r y was i t a l s o appears the w i t n e s s e s i n Dyson App. respect State, have 722 So. the jury was presume that the to relying (1872 ) , State, on 236 Gardner 'sworn a c c o r d i n g State, 782, 785 n.3 ("The law,' Ala. 48 summarized the Ala. to 263); sworn."). law in 1997): (Ala. "This C o u r t has carefully reviewed both the t r i a l t r a n s c r i p t and t h e c l e r k ' s r e c o r d , i n c l u d i n g t h e m i n u t e e n t r i e s on t h e c a s e a c t i o n s u m m a r y s h e e t s and the jury verdict forms, and there is no i n d i c a t i o n t h a t t h e j u r y was s w o r n . See T a r v e r v. S t a t e , 500 So. 2d 1 2 3 2 , 1242 ( A l a . Cr. App.), a f f ' d , 500 So. 2d 1256 ( A l a . 1 9 8 6 ) , c e r t . d e n i e d , 482 U.S. 920, 107 S. C t . 3 1 9 7 , 96 L. E d . 2d 685 (1987) ('[a] m i n u t e e n t r y i s d e e m e d t o be a s u f f i c i e n t showing t h a t t h e o a t h was a d m i n i s t e r e d ' ) ; P o r t e r v . S t a t e , 520 So. 2d 235, 237 (Ala. Cr. App. 1 987) ('statements i n the record such as "upon their 5 has s t a t i n g that were l i k e w i s e d u l y 2d that 263 Court 48 reflect Ala. ( G a r d n e r v. of C r i m i n a l Appeals v. e s t a b l i s h that a l s o Vaughn v. and area should t r a n s c r i p t must State, this suffices in this Court to a minute entry to court hearing. and The trial argument assumes t h a t the place. sworn argues, this Crim. 1081306 oaths" are s u f f i c i e n t t o show t h a t a jury was s w o r n ' ) ; M c G r u d e r v . S t a t e , 560 S o . 2 d 1 1 3 7 , 1 1 4 2 (Ala. Cr. App. 1989) ('[a]lthough the trial t r a n s c r i p t d o e s n o t i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e j u r y was s w o r n a f t e r the s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , b o t h the judgment e n t r y a n d t h e c a s e a c t i o n s u m m a r y s t a t e t h a t t h e j u r y was "duly empaneled, sworn and c h a r g e d by t h e C o u r t according to law"'). (Emphasis i n o r i g i n a l . ) " We conclude swearing of the jury minute entry Moreover, of a that i s immaterial the minute entry timely Crim. in light on A u g u s t 30 i n d i c a t i n g t h a t postjudgment A r m s t e a d v. S t a t e , (Ala. t h e s i l e n c e o f t h e t r a n s c r i p t as t o t h e App. of the t h e j u r y was i s presumed c o r r e c t motion specific raising sworn. i n the absence that issue. See 57 A l a . A p p . 4 5 9 , 4 6 2 , 329 S o . 2 d 1 5 0 , 152 1976): " W h i l e t h e f a i l u r e t o p r o p e r l y empanel t h e j u r y as r e q u i r e d b y l a w may b e r a i s e d b y m o t i o n f o r new t r i a l , F o w l e r v . S t a t e , 2 6 1 A l a . 2 6 2 , 74 S o . 2 d 512 [(1954)], unless there i s such challenge made a n d r u l i n g invoked i n the t r i a l court, then the minute e n t r y i n t h i s r e s p e c t w i l l be deemed t o be c o r r e c t . G a r d n e r v . S t a t e , 48 A l a . 2 6 3 [ ( 1 8 7 2 ) ] ; V a u g h n v . S t a t e , 236 A l a . 4 4 2 , 183 S o . 428 [(1938)]." (Emphasis added.) therefore, the minute Because the of there case-action Criminal Acoff d i d not f i l e entry i s presumed i s no c o n f l i c t s u m m a r y , we a postjudgment correct. between t h e t r a n s c r i p t and a f f i r m t h e judgment Appeals. 6 motion; of the Court 1081306 AFFIRMED. Cobb, C . J . , and S t u a r t , Bolin, 7 and Murdock, J J . , concur.

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.