holding “that a defendant asserting immunity based on self-defense under § 13A-3-23(d), Ala. Code 1976, is entitled to an opportunity to prove that claim by a preponderance of the evidence at a pretrial hearing before the court”
How later courts described this case
- holding “that a defendant asserting immunity based on self-defense under § 13A-3-23(d), Ala. Code 1976, is entitled to an opportunity to prove that claim by a preponderance of the evidence at a pretrial hearing before the court”
- holding that the defendant was entitled to a pretrial evidentiary hearing on his claim of immunity based on self-defense
- stating that “Alabama law has always allowed a defendant to argue self- defense at trial”
- "Because Harrison failed to object to the trial court's jury instructions, his arguments are not preserved for appellate review."
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
WELCH, Judge,
concurring specially.
I concur in the majority’s opinion.
I write specially because, as the majority states, when the Alabama Legislature enacted § 13A-3-23(d), Ala.Code 1975, it did not define the phrase “immune from criminal prosecution,” did not specify who would determine whether the defendant was eligible for immunity, and did not provide a procedure for determining whether immunity should be granted. Although this Court has now, out of necessity, decided those issues, I believe those decisions are best made by the Alabama Legislature or the' Alabama Supreme Court after proposed rules are submitted by the Standing Committee on the Alabama Rules of Criminal Procedure rather than by this Court. I encourage the legislature and the Supreme Court to resolve these matters so as to provide guidance to the circuit judges, district attorneys, and defense attorneys throughout the State.