# Carreker v. State

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · November 10, 1994 · 661 So. 2d 784

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9938769

## Case

- **Full name:** Danny Carreker v. State.
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama
- **Decided:** November 10, 1994
- **Citations:** 661 So. 2d 784; 1994 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 472; 1994 WL 620880
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Montiel
- **Judges:** Montiel, Patterson
- **Cited by:** 3 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9938769

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that involuntary manslaughter, defined either as reckless or negligent, was not a crime of moral turpitude, because it was "based on unintentional conduct, in contrast to those crimes involving some form of evil intent. It is not an offense that is mala in se and, thus…

## Opinion text

I respectfully dissent from the majority's holding that an unintentional killing is not a crime involving moral turpitude. "Moral turpitude has been defined as ' "an act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private and social duties which a man owes to his fellowmen or to society in general." ' " Meriwether v. Crown Investment Corporation , 289 Ala. 504 , 512 , 268 So.2d 780 (1972), quoting Lee v. Wisconsin State Board of Dental Examiners , 29 Wis.2d 330 , 139 N.W.2d 61 (1966). Rather than declaring that an unintentional killing is not a crime involving moral turpitude, I would hold that the specific conduct which resulted in the unintentional killing must be examined to determine whether the act involves moral turpitude. I can envision certain unintentional killings that would be considered mala in se. Therefore, I must dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9938769. Public record. Not legal advice.