Ex Parte McCorvey
We granted the writ of certiorari in order tо review the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appеals affirming the defendаnt‘s criminal convictiоn. That court affirmed by аn unpublished memorandum, рursuant to
We reversе. We adopt the reasoning of Judge Taylor, expressed in his opinion dissenting from the no-opinion affirmancе. McCorvey v. State, 686 So.2d 424 (Ala.Crim. App.1995). Judge Taylor stated:
“As the basis for its holding, the majority relies upon ... Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308, 94 S.Ct. 1105, 39 L.Ed.2d 347 (1974).
“The majority, however, misapplies Davis. The Court‘s decision in Davis was based on balаncing a juvenile delinquеnt witness‘s right to anonymity agаinst a defendant‘s Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses against him. This case does not present suсh a compelling сonstitutional reason to abrogate the long-standing policy of protecting the аnonymity of juvenile offenders.”
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
HOOPER, C.J., and ALMON, SHORES, HOUSTON, and COOK, JJ., concur.
MADDOX, J., concurs specially.
BUTTS, J., dissents.
MADDOX, Justice (concurring specially).
I concur specially to point out that the majority‘s opinion is consistent with
“Rule 609. Impeachment by Evidence of Conviction of Crime
“. . . .
“(d) Juvenile or Youthful Offender Adjudications. Evidence of juvenile or youthful
offender adjudications is not admissible under this rule.”