538 So. 2d 43 | Ala. | 1988
Certiorari was granted in this case under Rule 39(c)(4), A.R.App.P. Specifically, the question to be resolved is whether the finding of the Court of Criminal Appeals respecting the lack of circumstantial evidence of guilt is consistent with prior decisions on that subject. Upon review, we hold that the finding is not consistent; therefore, we reverse and remand the cause to that court.
A recitation of all the evidence on the defendant's connection with or participation in the charged offenses of third degree burglary and first degree theft of property is unnecessary. The opinion of the Court of Criminal Appeals,
Mrs. Ward also testified that she gave a statement conflicting with her testimony because of threats made by petitioner upon her life if she should testify against him. SeeHaisten v. State,
We respectfully disagree with the Court of Criminal Appeals, which found this case *44
to be analogous to Ex parte Williams,
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
TORBERT, C.J., and MADDOX, SHORES, ADAMS and STEAGALL, JJ., concur.