holding that plain error did not result from the circuit court’s failure to hold a suppression hearing when, among other things, “defense counsel never raised the issue of suppression at any time during the trial, nor did he object when the recording of Lane’s confession was entered into evidence”
How later courts described this case
- holding that plain error did not result from the circuit court’s failure to hold a suppression hearing when, among other things, “defense counsel never raised the issue of suppression at any time during the trial, nor did he object when the recording of Lane’s confession was entered into evidence”
- allowing victim’s wife’s testifimopy concerning victim’s son’s feelings when he learned that his father had been killed
- "We do not find the statistics or defense counsel's assertions that in his opinion no legitimate reasons for the strikes were revealed during voir dire to be sufficient to establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination."
- “In order for an individual to have significant or substantial deficits in adaptive behavior, he must have concurrent deficits or impairments in . . . at least two of the following skill areas: communication, self-care, home living, social/interpersonal skills, use of community resources, self-direction, functional academic skills, work, leisure, health and safety.” (quotation marks omitted)
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
WELCH, Judge,
dissenting.
I continue to adhere to my belief that Anthony Lane’s death sentence was not imposed following a correct consideration *1154 of the evidence regarding mental retardation. For the reasons I set forth in my dissent to this Court’s original opinion, I believe that Lane established adaptive deficiencies in more than two skill areas of adaptive functioning and, thus, that Lane is exempt from the imposition of a death sentence. See Lane v. State, 169 So.3d 1076 (Ala.Crim.App.2013) (Welch, J., dissenting). Moreover, I continue to believe, as I asserted in my dissent, that Lane’s journal containing his drawings and rap lyrics was inadmissible evidence of Lane’s guilt, and its admission constituted reversible error. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.