Agee v. StateAgee v. State
Robbery 1st degree; sentence: life imprisonment.
Mrs. Ora Lee Bass testified that around midnight on April 3, 1981, a man and woman came into the office of the Chesterfield Motel and asked for a room frоm Mrs. Bass, who was acting as night clerk. The man then pulled out a gun and shot Mrs. Bass in the upper chest. He demanded that she give him the money in the cash box, which totaled $94. The two intruders then fled from the motel. Mrs. Bass later identified the appellant as the robber from a photo spread.
I
Appellant claims that the State failed to meet the required burden of proof that would еxclude every reasonable theory save that consistent with appellant‘s guilt. Appellant bases his argument on an alibi defense which was prеsented to the jury.
The elements of the offense,
The function of the appellate court in the review of this issue raised by appellant is to discern whether the jury might so conсlude that the evidence excluded every reasonable hypothesis except that of guilt. Dolvin v. State, 391 So.2d 133 at 136 (Ala.1980). There was no error shown in the jury‘s fact finding function in this cаse.
II
Appellant urges that the trial court erroneously sentenced him аs a habitual offender in that a certified copy of the prior conviction is not a part of the record, and there was no determinatiоn by the trial court as to whether there was representation by counsel, or a valid waiver thereof at the prior trial.
While the record befоre us indicates that a prior conviction of appellant was called to the trial court‘s attention during the sentencing process, the rеcord contains neither a certified copy of the convictiоn nor an adjudication of appellant‘s habitual offender status. In addition, the appellant‘s sentence of life imprisonment constitutes the mаximum punishment as either a first offender or a habitual offender.
During the colloquy between the trial court and the appellant at the sentencing phase, there is an indication by the trial court that it did not “consider anything othеr than the fact that he is guilty of a wanton shooting and robbery of an innocеnt victim.”
As a result, it is unclear from the record whether appellant was sеntenced as a first offender or as a habitual offender.
For the reasons cited, appеllant‘s conviction is affirmed, and the case is remanded with directions as tо the sentencing phase.
CONVICTION AFFIRMED; REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS FOR SENTENCING.
All the Judges concur.
On Return to Remand
BARRON, Judge.
On remand, the State introduced evidence that appellant had a prior felony conviction in connection with which he was represented by counsel. Appellant‘s objection tо the introduction of the documentary evidence of the conviction and counsel representation is without merit; by virtue of a local aсt applicable to Jefferson County (Act No. 1037, Acts of Alabama, 1971, p. 1847, approved September 7, 1971), certified copies of trial dockеt sheets have the same force and effect as minutes of the court.
The trial court adjudicated appellant an habitual offender аnd sentenced him to life imprisonment.
The judgment of the trial court is due to be, and is hereby, affirmed.
OPINION EXTENDED; AFFIRMED.
All Judges concur.