Justia Constitutional Law Opinion Summaries

Engineering Design Group, LLC, and David Stovall, the principal of Engineering Design Group, LLC (collectively, "EDG"), and Building & Earth Sciences, Inc. ("BES"), filed separate petitions to the Alabama Supreme Court, each seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the St. Clair Circuit Court ("the trial court") to enter an order transferring the action filed in the trial court by plaintiffs Delaney Exchange, LLC, and Springdale Stores Exchange, LLC, to the Shelby Circuit Court. After review, the Supreme Court concluded EDG and BES carried their burden of showing that Shelby County's connection to the action was strong, and St. Clair County's connection to the action was considerably weak. Thus, the trial court exceeded its discretion in refusing to transfer the case to the Shelby Circuit Court, and the interest of justice required the transfer. View "Ex parte Engineering Design Group, LLC" on Justia Law

Michael Kelley petitioned for certiorari review of a Court of Criminal Appeals' decision to affirm the trial court's judgment sentencing Kelley to death for his convictions for two counts of capital murder, and for sentencing him to life for his conviction on one count of sexual torture. The Alabama Supreme Court granted Kelley's petition solely to determine whether the Court of Criminal Appeals lacked jurisdiction to review Kelley's sexual-torture conviction. After that review, the Court reversed in part and remand. Kelley alleged that the Court of Criminal Appeals lacked jurisdiction to affirm his sexual-torture conviction because, he argues, his sexual-torture conviction was not ripe for appeal, and on this ground, the Supreme Court agreed. View "Ex parte Michael Brandon Kelley." on Justia Law

Petitioners R.J.J., W.L.C., and W.F. were convicted of hunting after dark, hunting from a public road, and hunting with the aid of an automobile. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed their convictions by an unpublished memorandum. The petitioners challenged the sufficiency of the State's evidence, arguing: (1) the State produced no evidence indicating that the petitioners had in their possession an artificial light suitable for night hunting and that the State produced tenuous evidence indicating that the petitioners were in an area frequented by protected wildlife; (2) the State's circumstantial evidence failed to link the petitioners to the shots allegedly fired and that evidence of two shots fired could not support three hunting convictions; and (3) the State failed to prove that the petitioners had the intent to hunt. The Supreme Court reversed petitioners' convictions and instructed the trial court to enter a judgment acquitting petitioners of all charges. View "Ex parte W. F., W.L.C., and R. J. J." on Justia Law