author: MOORE, Judge.

text:
    Lauren Adelle COLLINS v. Brian Patrick O’NEIL
    2150767
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    January 27, 2017

      Thomas Logan Davis and Lauren Glass Spradling of Peeples & Davis, Birmingham, for appellant.
    Submitted on appellant’s brief only.
   MOORE, Judge.

Lauren Adelle Collins (“the mother”) appeals from a judgment entered by the Lee Circuit Court (“the trial court”) to the extent that it modified the child-support obligation of Brian Patrick O’Neil (“the father”); ordered the father’s child-support obligation abated during his six-week summer visitation with the parties’ three minor children (“the children”); declined to allow the mother any visitation with the children during the father’s six-week summer-visitation period; declined to award interest on the father’s child-support ar-rearage; and declined to hold the father in contempt for failure to pay child support. We affirm the trial court’s judgment in part and reverse it in part.

Background and Procedural History

On September 25, 2012, the parties were divorced by a judgment of the trial court, which incorporated an agreement of the parties. The mother was awarded sole physical custody of the children and the father was awarded visitation every other week from Friday until the following Wednesday, as well as certain holiday and summer visitation. The father was ordered to pay $1,191.67 in monthly child support and to maintain the children on his health-insurance plan. The parties were to split the children’s child-care expenses.

At the time of the divorce, both parties were living in New Market; however, in May 2013, the mother moved to Tennessee and the father moved to Georgia. The father subsequently moved from Georgia to Auburn. Because of the logistics of travel between the parties’ residences, the parties negotiated an amended settlement agreement, which provided that the father would have visitation with the children every other weekend and every other week during the summer, that the mother would meet the father halfway between their residences for visitation purposes, that the mother would be responsible for the children’s health-insurance premiums and child-care expenses during the school year, and that the father’s child-support obligation would increase to $1,950 per month. The evidence indicated that the father had signed the amended settlement agreement and had had it delivered to the mother for her to sign and to file with the trial court; the mother, however, never signed the amended settlement agreement, and it was never filed. The mother testified that that failure had been an oversight on her part. The father did not find out that the amended settlement agreement had not been filed until May 2014. It was undisputed that the parties began operating under the amended settlement agreement in the summer of 2013 and that they continued to abide by the terms of the amended settlement agreement for the remainder of 2013 and the entirety of 2014.

On September 19, 2014, the father filed a petition for modification of, among other things, his child-support obligation and his visitation with the children. On October 24, 2014, the mother filed an answer and a counterclaim seeking to' hold the father in contempt for failure to pay child support. On December 18, 2014, the father filed a reply to the counterclaim.

. The mother contended that, in January 2015, the father had been delinquent on his child-support obligation and that, therefore, she had refused to meet him halfway for. his visitation. The father stopped paying child support altogether in May 2015. He testified that, per the advice of his attorney, he believed that, because the amended settlement agreement had not been approved by the- trial court, that agreement was void and, therefore, he was entitled to a credit for overpayment of child support.

After a trial, the trial court entered a judgment on February 9, 2016, adopting the amended settlement agreement of the parties and concluding that the father had accrued a child-support arrearage from May 2015 through January 2016 in the amount of $ 16,575.00. The trial court modified the father’s child-support obligation from the date of the judgment forward to $928.56 per month. The trial court also modified the father’s visitation to include six consecutive weeks of summer visitation.

On February 15,2016, the mother-filed a postjudgment motion. The father filed a postjudgment motion on February 23, 2016. On April 14, 2016, the mother filed an amended postjudgment motion. After a hearing, the trial court entered an amended judgment providing, among other things, that, during the father’s six-week summer-visitation period, he would not be required to pay child support but would be responsible for the children’s child-care expenses during that period. On June. 8, 2016, the mother filed her notice of appeal.

Discussion

On appeal, the mother first argues that the trial court erred in not including all the father’s income in calculating his child-support obligation. She notes that, although the father claimed that his monthly income was anywhere between $2,400 and $2,895.90, his annual deposits into his bank account were $70,678.21 for 2013, $60,181.66 for 2014, and $21,423.56 for the first 3 months of 2015. Neither party presented evidence of the nature of each and every deposit.

The mother relies on Chunn v. Chunn, 183 So.3d 985, 992 (Ala. Civ. App. 2015), and argues' that, because the father failed to explain, the deposits made into his bank account, the trial court was bound to accept those deposits as his true income for child-support purposes. 183 So.3d at 991-98. In Chunn, the father in that case appealed from, a judgment determining his child-support obligation, and, on appeal,- he contended that the trial court had improperly considered unexplained deposits made into his account as income. Id. This court concluded, however, that, considering the ore tenus standard of review, the trial court could have concluded that those unexplained deposits were, in fact, income. Id.

In the present case, the trial court heard the father testify, that his income from employment was $2,400 per month, that he also received other income, such as rental income, and that he had expenses associated with the rental income. The father also testified that, his present wife contributes to their household income. The trial court, in the present case, could have concluded that some of the father’s deposits were related to,the income of the father’s wife and his rental income, which .he also had expenses associated with. . See Rule 32(B)(3)(a), Ala. R. Jud. Admin. (“For inr come from self-employment, rent, royalties, proprietorship of business, or joint ownership of partnership or closely held corporation, ‘gross income’ means gross receipts minus ordinary and necessary expenses required to produce this income, as allowed by the Internal Revenue Service .... ”). Furthermore, given the ore tenus standard of review, the trial court could have concluded that the father’s testimony regarding his income was reliable. Chunn, 193 So.3d at 992 (“[W]hen the trial court receives ore tenus evidence, it is in the best position to evaluate the demeanor and credibility of a witness .,..”).

. Considering our standard of review in this matter, we cannot conclude that the trial court exceeded its discretion in. crediting the father’s testimony regarding his income, as true. Therefore, we decline to reverse the trial court’s judgment based on this jssue.

II.

The mother next argues that the trial court erred in abating the father’s child-support obligation during his summer visitation without stating a reason for its deviation from the child-support guidelines of Rule 32, Ala. R. Jud. Admin. We note, however, that the trial court stated that it was requiring the father to be “solely responsible” for all child-care expenses during that six-week period. The mother does not argue that that provision is not a sufficient reason for deviating from the guidelines. “An argument not made on appeal is abandoned or waived.” Avis Rent A Car Sys., Inc. v. Heilman, 876 So.2d 1111, 1124 n.8 (Ala. 2003). Based on the foregoing, we decline to reverse the trial court’s judgment on this point.

Ill,

The mother also argues that the trial court erred in not awarding her any contact with the children during the father’s six-week summer-visitation period. We initially note, however, that the mother cites no authority in support of her argument.

“‘Rule 28(a)(10)[, Ala. R. App. P.,] requires that arguments in briefs contain discussions of facts and relevant legal authorities that- support the party’s position, If they do not, the arguments are waived.’ White Sands Grp., L.L.C. v. PRS II, LLC, 998 So.2d 1042, 1058 (Ala. 2008); see also Bishop v. Robinson, 516 So.2d 723, 724 (Ala. Civ. App. 1987) (quoting Thoman [Eng’rs], Inc. v. McDonald, 57 Ala.App. 287, 290, 328 So.2d 293, 294 (Civ. App. 1976)) (noting that an appellant should present his issues “with clarity and without ambiguity’” and ‘fully express his position on the enumerated issues’ in the argument section of his brief); accord United States v. Zannino, 895 F.2d 1, 17 (1st Cir. 1990) (‘It is not enough merely to mention.a possible argument in the most skeletal way, leaving the court to do counsel’s work, create the ossature for.the argument, and put flesh on its bones.’).”. ,

Hudson v. Hudson, 178 So.3d 861, 865 (Ala. Civ. App. 2014). Additionally,

“[a] trial court has broad discretion in deciding on visitation rights of the noncustodial parent. Wallace v. Wallace, 485 So.2d 740 (Ala. Civ. App. 1986), This discretion applies to modification proceedings as well as to the original custody proceeding. Id. When the issue of visitation is determined after oral proceedings, the trial court’s determination of the issue will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion or a showing that it is plainly in error. Andrews v. Andrews, 520 So.2d 512 (Ala. Civ. App. 1987).’ Dominick v. Dominick, 622 So.2d 402, 403 (Ala. Civ. App. 1993).”

Flanagan v. Flanagan, 656 So.2d 1228, 1230 (Ala. Civ. App. 1995), Without any specific evidence indicating that the children’s best interests will not be served by the visitation award, we cannot conclude that the trial court exceeded its discretion on this point.

IV.

The mother also argues that the trial court erred in failing’to award her interest on the child-support arrearage. “ ‘[A] trial court with jurisdiction over proceedings to enforce an earlier child-support judgment is without authority to waive the imposition of statutorily imposed postjudgment interest upon such payments.’ ” T.L.D. v. C.G., 849 So.2d 200, 204 (Ala. Civ. App. 2002) (quoting Walker v. Walker, 828 So.2d 943, 945 (Ala. Civ. App. 2002)). Accordingly, we conclude that the trial court erred in failing to award interest on the father’s child-support arrearage. We therefore reverse the trial court’s judgment on this point, and we remand this cause for the trial court to compute the amount of interest owed on the father’s child-support arrearage and to enter a judgment in accordance therewith.

V.

Finally, the mother argues that the trial court erred in declining to hold the father in contempt for his failure to pay child support. Rule 70A(a)(2), Ala. R. Civ. P., provides, in pertinent part:

“(C) ‘Criminal contempt’ means ...
“(ii) Willful disobedience or resistance of any person to a court’s lawful writ, subpoena, process, order, rule, or command, where the dominant purpose of the finding of contempt is to punish the contemnor.
“(D) ‘Civil contempt’ means willful, continuing failure or refusal of any person to comply with a court’s lawful writ, subpoena, process, order, rule, or command that by its nature is still capable of being complied with.”

Considering that, before the entry of the judgment under review, the parties’ amended settlement agreement was never ratified by the trial court and that the father testified that his attorney had advised him that he had a credit toward his child-support obligation, the trial court could have properly concluded that the father’s nonpayment was not willful. Therefore, we cannot find error on this point.

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, we reverse the trial court’s judgment to the extent that it failed to award interest on the father’s child-support arrearage. We affirm the judgment in all other respects.

The mother’s request for the award of attorney’s fees on appeal is denied.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

Thompson, P.J., and Pittman, Thomas, and Donaldson, JJ., concur.

      . The father did not cross-appeal regarding the trial court’s retroactive adoption of the parties' amended settlement agreement; therefore, we do not address the propriety of that action.

      . " ‘Under Alabama law, child-support payment ''installments become final judgments as of the date due.” Osborne v. Osborne, 57 Ala.App. 204, 206, 326 So.2d 766, 767 (Ala. Civ. App. 1976). Because "judgments for the payment of money bear interest from the date of rendition” "it follows that such [child-support] judgments would bear interest from due date.” Osborne, 57 Ala.App. at 206, 326 So.2d at 767. Therefore, to properly calculate interest on an arrearage, one would have to compute the interest due on each installment from its due date. Id.’ ”
      T.L.D., 849 So.2d at 204 (quoting Hollen v. Conley, 840 So.2d 921, 924 (Ala. Civ. App. 2002)).


source: Caselaw Access Project

author: DONALDSON, Judge.

license: Public Domain

text:
    EX PARTE HIBBETT SPORTING GOODS, INC. (In re: Keith Cantrell v. Hibbett Sporting Goods, Inc.)
    2160069
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    January 27, 2017

      Lonnie D. Wainwright, Jr., and Daniel S. Flickinger of Wainwright, Pope & McMeekin, P.C., Birmingham, for petitioner.
    Steven W. Ford and Burke M. Spree of Lewis, Smyth & Ford, LLC, Tuscaloosa, for respondent.
   DONALDSON, Judge.

Hibbett Sporting Goods, Inc., (“Hibbett Sporting Goods”), petitions this court for a writ of mandamus directing the Lamar Circuit Court (“the trial court”) to vacate its order denying Hibbett Sporting Goods’ motion for a change of venue and to enter an order transferring the underlying workers’ compensation action to the Jefferson Circuit Court. Hibbett Sporting Goods made a prima facie showing that venue was improper in Lamar County and that Jefferson County was a proper yenue. In response, the plaintiff, Keith Cantrell, argued that venue was proper in Lamar County because of his residency there and because, he asserted, Hibbett Sporting Goods did business, by agent in that county. For the reasons set forth below, we grant the petition and issue the writ.

Background

On July 15, 2016, Cantrell filed , in the trial court a complaint against Hibbett Sporting Goods seeking workers’ compensation benefits. Cantrell claimed- that he had been injured in Indiana while working for Hibbett Sporting Goods. On August 22, 2016, Hibbett Sporting Goods filed a motion to transfer the action to Jefferson County, asserting that Lamar County-was an improper venue. Hibbett Sporting Goods . supported its, motion to transfer with the affidavit of Aimee .Andrews, a manager of human resources for Hibbett Sporting Goods. In her affidavit, Andrews testified, in relevant part:

“[Hibbett Sporting-Goods] is a Delaware Corporation, With its principal place of business being located at 2700 Milan Court in Birmingham, Alabama which is located in Jefferson County. [Hibbett Sporting Goods] has a wholesale and logistics facility located at 201 Corporate Woods Drive in Alabaster, Alabama which is located in Shelby County. [Hibbett Sporting Goods] does not do business and has not done business, by agent or otherwise, in Lamar County, Alabama. [Hibbett Sporting Goods] does not have any offices located in Lamar County, Alabama. [Hibbett Sporting Goods] does not have assets located in Lamar County, Alabama. [Hibbett Sporting Goods] does not have any stores or warehouse facilities in Lamar County, Alabama.
“[Cantrell] was hired on April 15, 2007, as a CDL driver. He reported to the Transportation Manager in our wholesale and logistics facility at the Shelby County, Alabama location. On or about May 21, 2014, while working at a store in Shelbyville, Indiana, [Cantrell] reported that he was injured while ‘putting plywood onto wall and box of stadium chairs fell off and hit his knee making it twist.’ He thereafter received medical treatment initially by physicians in Birmingham,. Jefferson County, and then later by a physician in Tuscaloosa County, Alabama.” -

On October 7, 2016, Cantrell filed a reply to the motion to transfer. He contended that venue was proper in Lamar County pursuant to § 6-3-7(a)(3), Ala. Code 1975, which provides, in relevant part, that a civil action against a corporation may be brought in the county in which the plaintiff resides if the corporation does business by agent in that county. Cantrell asserted that, for the purpose of establishing venue, Hibbett Team Sales, Inc. (“Hibbett Team Sales”), a separate corporation, acted as an agent for Hibbett Sporting Goods in . Lamar County. Cantrell submitted an affidavit in which he testified that he resided in Lamar County both at the time of the accident and at the time of the filing of the workers’ compensation complaint. Cantrell also attached to his reply an annual report (“the Hibbett Sports annual report”) filed by Hibbett Sports, Inc. (“Hibbett Sports”); a document prepared by Andrews titled “Employer’s First Report of Injury or Occupational Disease” (“the injury report”); a copy of the home page of the Web site for Hibbett Team Sales (“the Hibbett Team Sales home page”); an affidavit from Tommy Chism, the principal and a coach for an elementary school in Lamar County; and an affidavit from Mathew Byars, an assistant principal and a coach for a. high school in Lamar County. The Hibbett Sports annual report states, in relevant part:

“Our Company began in 1945 under the name Dixie Supply Company in Florence, Alabama. Although we initially specialized primarily in the marine and small aircraft business, by 1960 we were solely in the sporting goods business.... We became a public company in October.-1996 when we had 79 stores and were incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware as Hibbett Sporting Goods, Inc. We incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware as Hibbett Sports, Inc. in January 2007, and on February 10, 2007, Hibbett Sports, Inc. became the successor holding company for. Hibbett Sporting Goods, Inc., which is npw opr operating subsidiary.
“Today, we operate sporting goods stores in small and. mid-sized markets predominantly in the South, Southwest, Mid-Atlantic' and the Midwest. As of .January 31, 2015, we operated 988 stores consisting of 969 Hibbett Sports stores and 19 smaller-format Sports Additions athletic shoe stores in 31 states. Our primary retail format and growth vehicle is Hibbett Sports, an approximately 5,000 square foot- store located primarily in strip centers which are frequently influenced by a Wal-Mart store.
“We offer convenient locations and a broad assortment of brand-name quality footwear, apparel and athletic equipment with a high level of customer, service. Our merchandise assortment emphasizes team sports complemented by localized apparel, footwear and accessories .designed to appeal to a wide range of customers within each individual market.”

The injury report lists the employer, as “Hibbett Sports, Inc.,” and lists the employer’s address as being the same address Andrews testified in her affidavit is the principal place of business for Hibbett Sporting Goods. The Hibbett Team Sales home page states, in relevant part:

“[Hibbett Team Sales] is a full line sporting goods dealer focused on serving schools and teams with their athletic equipment, footwear and apparel needs.
“Hibbett Sporting Goods was founded in 1945 under the name Dixie Supply Company and sold merchandise such as boats, marine equipment and even small aircraft. In 1949 Dixie Supply Company entered the team and school athletic equipment business. ' 1'
“In 1952 Dixie Supply Company became Hibbett and Sons, Inc. Over the next seven years, all merchandise not related to athletic equipment, apparel, and footwear was slowly dropped out of inventory. By 1968 75% of all sales consisted of school and team business. In 1969 the company became [Hibbett Sporting Goods].
“We are now [Hibbett Team Sales], a subsidiary of [Hibbett Sports]. Many things have changed since 1945, but the things that have not changed is our commitment to provide excellent service to our customer and supply quality products at competitive pricing.”

In their affidavits, Chism and Byars testified that representatives from Hibbett Team Sales visited Lamar County to sell athletic equipment and merchandise and that their respective schools purchased such products from Hibbett Team Sales.

On October 10, 2016, Hibbett Sporting Goods filed a response to Cantrell’s reply, asserting, in part, that no agency relationship existed between it and Hibbett Team Sales. Hibbett Sporting Goods supported its response with affidavits from Elizabeth Hill and Frank Powell. In her affidavit, Hill, senior counsel for Hibbett Sporting Goods, testified:

“[Hibbett Sporting Goods] maintains and operates athletic specialty retail stores throughout the United States. [Hibbett Sporting Goods] maintains its own employees, assets, inventory, and business model solely for the purpose of operating its retail store line of business.
“[Hibbett Sports] is a- holding company for publicly traded stock. [Hibbett Sports] does not have any employees, and does not maintain control over the operations of [Hibbett Sporting Goods].
“[The injury report] filed in connection with Mr. Cantrell’s alleged worker’s compensation claim with [Hibbett Sporting Goods] incorrectly lists the employer name as ‘Hibbett Sports, Inc.’ The correct employer is [Hibbett Sporting Goods].”

In his affidavit, Powell, a vice president of Hibbett Team Sales, testified:

“We have no record of a Keith Cantrell ever being employed by [Hib.bett Team Sales]. [Hibbett Team Sales] maintains its own assets, inventory, employees, and website to support its business model of direct sales to educational institutions. [Hibbett Team Sales] operates independently of [Hibbett Sporting Goods] and does not share any of itassets, employees, or facilities with [Hibbett Sporting Goods].”

On October 11, 2016, the trial court conducted a hearing on Hibbett Sporting Goods’ motion to transfer. During the hearing, the trial court initially granted Cantrell’s oral motion to strike the affidavits of Hill and Powell as having been untimely filed. The trial court then withdrew its ruling striking the affidavits of Hill and Powell.

On October 11, 2016, the trial court entered an order denying Hibbett Sporting Goods’ motion to transfer. On October 27, 2016, Hibbett Sporting Goods filed its petition for a writ of mandamus. Cantrell has included in his answer a request that this court not consider the affidavits of Hill and Powell.

Standard of Review

“‘The proper method for obtaining review of a denial of a motion for a change of venue in a civil action is to petition for the writ of mandamus.’ Ex parte Alabama Great Southern R.R., 788 So.2d 886, 888 (Ala. 2000). Mandamus is a drastic and extraordinary writ, to be issued only where there is (1) a clear legal right in the petitioner to the order sought; (2) an imperative duty upon the respondent to perform, accompanied by a refusal to do so; (3) the lack of another adequate remedy; and (4) properly invoked jurisdiction of the court.’ Ex parte Integon Corp., 672 So.2d 497, 499 (Ala. 1995). Moreover, our review is limited to those facts that were before the trial court. Ex parte National Sec. Ins. Co., 727 So.2d 788, 789 (Ala. 1998).”

Ex parte Pike Fabrication, Inc., 859 So.2d 1089, 1091 (Ala. 2002).

“ ‘The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.’” Id. (quoting Ex parte Finance America Corp., 507 So.2d 458, 460 (Ala. 1987)). If the movant makes a prima facie showing that a county is an improper venue, the burden shifts to the party asserting proper venue in that county to rebut the prima facie showing. Ex parte Alabama Med. Ctr., 109 So.3d 1114, 1116 (Ala. 2012) (citing Ex parte Movie Gallery, Inc., 31 So.3d 104, 109 (Ala. 2009)). “In addition, this Court is bound by the record, and it eannot consider a statement or evidence in a party’s brief that was not before the trial court.” Ex parte Pike Fabrication, Inc., 859 So.2d at 1091 (citing Ex parte American Res. Ins. Co., 663 So.2d 932, 936 (Ala. 1995)).

Discussion

Hibbett Sporting Goods contends that venue is improper in Lamar County pursuant to § 25-5-1(18), Ala. Code 1975, and § 6-3-7, Ala. Code 1975. Section 25-5-1(18) provides that the term “court” as used in the Workers’ Compensation Act, § 25-5-1 et seq., Ala. Code 1975, means “[t]he circuit court that would have jurisdiction in an ordinary civil action involving a claim for the injuries or death in question .... ” See Ex parte Adams, 11 So.3d 243, 247 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008) (holding that § 6-3-7 applied to the determination of venue in a workers’ compensation case involving a corporate employer). Section 6-3-7(a) provides:

“All civil actions against corporations may be brought in any of the following counties:
“(1) In the county in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of real property that is the subject of the action is situated; or
“(2) In the county of the corporation’s principal office in this state; or
“(3) In the county in which the plaintiff resided, or if the plaintiff is an entity other than an individual, where the plaintiff had its principal office in this state, at the time of the accrual of the cause of action, if such corporation does business by agent in the county of the plaintiffs residence; or
.“(4) If subdivisions (1), (2), or (3) do not apply, in any county in which the corporation was doing business by agent at the time of the accrual of the cause of action.”

It is undisputed that Cantrell’s alleged accident occurred in Shelbyville, Indiana, and that Hibbett Sporting Goods’ principal office is in Jefferson County. Accordingly, venue is proper in Jefferson County pursuant to § 6-3-7(a)(2), and Lamar County is not a proper venue pursuant to § 6-3-7(a)(1) or (2). “[T]he ‘“catch-all” venue provision, § 6—3—7(a)(4), applies only if no county would be a proper forum under the other three corporate-venue provisions.’” Ex parte Thomasville Feed & Seed, Inc., 74 So.3d 940, 942 (Ala. 2011) (quoting Ex parte Siemag, Inc., 53 So.3d 974, 980 n.3 (Ala. Civ. App. 2010)). Because venue would be proper in Jefferson County under § 6-3-7(a)(2), § 6-3-7(a)(4) does not apply in this case.

Section. 6—3—7(a)(3) provides that a civil action may be brought against a corporation “[i]n the county in which the plaintiff resided ... if such corporation does business by agent in the county of the plaintiffs residence.” There is no dispute as to Cantrell’s residency in Lamar County. In its motion to transfer, Hibbett Sporting Goods submitted the affidavit of Andrews in which she testified that Hib-bett Sporting Goods did not do business by agent or otherwise in Lamar County. Hibbett Sporting Goods, therefore, presented a prima facie showing that venue in Lamar County was not proper pursuant to § 6-3-7(a)(3). Accordingly, the burden shifted to Cantrell to rebut that prima facie showing.

In his response to the motion to transfer, Cantrell asserted that Hibbett Team Sales was an agent for Hibbett Sporting Goods in Lamar County for the purpose of determining venue under § 6—3—7(a)(3).

“[I]n Ex parte Peabody Galion Co., 497 So.2d 1126 (Ala. 1986), [the supreme court] held that the standard for testing agency for venue purposes is different from the standard for testing agency for the purpose of liability, [The supreme court] discussed the standard as follows:
“‘The term .“agency” is frequently used to describe an arrangement which does not rise to the level of a principal/agent relationship and which is not governed by the law of respondent superior. See Black’s Law Dictionary, (rev. 4th ed. 1968); and 3 Am. Jur. 2d Agency § 2, p. 510. Indeed, that term “is also often used in statutes or constitutional provisions in a more restricted sense than that commonly given it, and, where so used, its significance must generally be determined by a study of the context.” 2A C.J.S. Agency § 4, p. 557 (1972).
“Id. at 1128-29. Peabody tells us that for the purpose of venue, the element of control, or lack thereof, of the principal over its.agent is not determinative, Id. at 1129. If the entity is the ‘means’ by which the principal is able to do business in a particular bounty, then the entity is the ‘agent’ of the principal for venue purposes. In Peabody, [the supreme court] found that an independent corporation, acting as a distributor of products for another corporation, was .an ‘agent’ for the purpose of venue, because it was a ‘means’ by which the principal corporation did business. Id.“

Ex parte Charter Retreat Hosp., Inc., 538 So.2d 787, 789-90 (Ala. 1989). “ ‘ “[A] corporation ‘does business’ in a county for purposes of § 6-3-7 if, with some regularity, it performs there some of the business functions for which it was created.” ’ ” Ex parte Pike Fabrication, 859 So.2d at 1093 (quoting Ex parte Wiginton, 743 So.2d 1071, 1074-75 (Ala. 1999), quoting in turn Ex parte SouthTrust Bank of Tuscaloosa, N.A., 619 So.2d 1356, 1358 (Ala. 1993)). “Doing business” includes “the sale of [a] corporation’s products.” Ex parte Peabody Galion Co., 497 So.2d 1126, 1129 (Ala. 1986).

The materials submitted by both parties indicate that both Hibbett Sporting Goods and Hibbett Team Sales are subsidiaries of Hibbett Sports. Although the evidence indicates that Hibbett Sports is the principal of both Hibbett Sporting Goods and Hibbett Team Sales, § 6—3—7(a)(3) requires that the defendant corporation have an agent, not a principal, that does business in-the county. See Ex parte Diamond Scaffold Servs. Grp., Inc., 159 So.3d 1286, 1289 (Ala. Civ. App. 2014) (holding that there was no legal authority “standing for the proposition that an action may be brought against an agent in a county where its principal does business”).

Cantrell argues that Hibbett Sporting Goods is the sole operating subsidiary of Hibbett Sports and that, therefore, Hibbett Team Sales is controlled by Hibbett Sporting Goods. Even if the evidence established that type of relationship between the companies, “the element of control, or lack thereof, of the principal over its agent is not determinative.” Ex parte Charter Retreat Hosp., Inc., 538 So.2d at 789. The evidence presented in support of Cantrell’s reply to the motion to transfer indicates that both Hibbett Sporting Goods and Hibbett Team Sales sell athletic equipment and merchandise but that Hibbett Sporting Goods sells its products through its retail stores and Hibbett Team Sales sells its products directly to schools. For the purposes of venue, an agent must be the “ ‘means’ by which the principal is able to do business in a particular county.” Id. at 790. The only business function raised by Cantrell is the sale of products. The materials submitted to us do not show that Hibbett Team Sales sells Hibbett Sporting Goods’ products in Lamar County' or enables Hibbett Sporting Goods to sell its products in Lamar County. Moreover, Hibbett Sporting Goods preented testimonial evidence indicating that Hibbett Team Sales operates independently of Hibbett Sporting Goods and has separate inventory, assets, employees, and. facilities. Therefore, the evidence submitted to the trial court fails to show that Hibbett Team Sales was Hibbett Sporting Goods’ agent, in Lamar County for the purpose of determining venue under § 6-3-7(a)(3).

Conclusion

: Based on' the foregoing, we hold that Hibbett Sporting Goods has demonstrated a clear , legal right to a writ of mandamus directing the trial court to vacate its order denying the motion to change venue and to .enter an order transferring this action to the Jefferson Circuit Court.

PETITION GRANTED; WRIT ISSUED.

Thompson, P.J., and Pittman, Thomas, and Moore, JJ., concur.

      . The Hibbett Sports annual report is an excerpt from a document that Cantrell asserted was Hibbett Sports' Form 10-k filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ending January 30, 2015.

      . The parties do not dispute that Hibbett Sporting Goods was Cantrell’s employer.

      . Cantrell requested that this court not consider the affidavits of Hill and Powell on the basis that they were untimely filed pursuant to Rule 6(d), Ala. R. Civ. P., which provides: "[0]pposing affidavits may be served not later than one (1) day before the hearing, unless the court permits them to be served at some other time.” Even though the affidavits of Hill and Powell were submitted the day before the hearing on the motion to transfer, the trial court allowed the submission of the affidavits. The consideration of untimely affidavits is within the trial court's discretion. Weldon v. Cotney, 811 So.2d 530, 533 (Ala. 2001). Cantrell fails to argue that the trial court exceeded its discretion in considering the affidavits, We therefore decline Cantrell's request that we not consider the affidavits..


author: THOMAS, Judge.

text:
    EX PARTE Michael GENTRY (In re: Nancy Norris Schillaci and Ben Schillaci v. Michael Gentry Eddie Raymond Gentry and Robin Lynne Gentry v. Michael Gentry)
    2160155
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    January 27, 2017

      William K. Bradford and Amber L. Lad-ner of Bradford Ladner, LLP, Mountain Brook, for petitioner Michael Gentry.
    Wendy Brooks Crew and Christine Vice Vineyard of Crew Gentle Law, P.C., Birmingham, for respondents Nancy Norris Schillaci and Ben Schillaci.
    John L. Bodie, Trussville, guardian ad litem.
   THOMAS, Judge.

Michael Gentry (“the father”) seeks review of orders of the Jefferson Circuit Court (“the trial court”) entered in consolidated grandparent-visitation actions filed by Nancy Norris Schillaci (“the maternal grandmother”) and Ben Schillaci (“the maternal stepgrandfather”) and by Eddie Raymond Gentry (“the paternal grandfather”) and Robin Lynne Gentry (“the paternal stepgrandmother”). The attachments to the father’s petition for the writ of mandamus and the answers filed with this court reveal the following facts and procedural history.

The father and - his wife, Whitney Gen-trys who died in February 2014, were the parents of three children, In August 2016, the maternal grandmother and the maternal stepgrandfather filed a complaint in the trial court seeking an award of visitar tion with the- children pursuant to Ala. Code 1975, § 30-3-4.2, which became effective on August 1, 2016, See Act No. 2016-362, § 6, Ala. Acts 2016. That same day, the paternal grandfather and the paternal stepgrandmother filed a ' similar complaint. The trial court consolidated the actions and appointed a guardian ad litem for the children.

In September 2016, the father moved to dismiss the. actions. One of the arguments the father asserted in his motion, as amended, was that the maternal step-grandfather and the paternal stepgrand-mother should be dismissed as parties to their respective actions because, he contended, neither is a “grandparent” as that term is defined in § 30-3-4,2(a)(1); therefore, the father argued, they lacked “standing” to bring the actions under § 30-3-4.2(b). The trial court denied the father’s motion by order entered on October 3, 2016.

On October 11, 2016, the guardian ad litem filed on behalf of the children what she labeled as a “cross claim” against the father. The “cross claim" contained three counts: a request for a judgment declaring that the children have a liberty interest in familial association with their extended family and two identical counts requesting an injunction requiring the father to permit continued association between the children and their extended family. Counts two and three asserted that the children’s rights to familial association had “been infringed under color of state law.”

The father, on October 25, 2016, filed a motion to dismiss the “cross claim,” in which he asserted various arguments. At a hearing held on November 16, 2016, the trial court orally granted the father’s motion to dismiss regarding counts two and three of the “cross claim” but denied the motion as to count one, the declaratory-judgment count. The trial court did not render or enter a written order on the father’s motion to dismiss.

On December 1, 2016, the trial court entered an order directing the circuit-court clerk to “place this entire case UNDER SEAL” (capitalization in original). The December 1, 2016, order states no reason for the trial court’s decision to seal the cases. No party had moved for such relief, and no hearing regarding the decision to seal the cases had been held. The maternal grandmother and maternal stepgrandfather state in their answer to the father’s petition for the writ of mandamus that the trial court, at a hearing held on December 2, 2016, “addressed the qrder sealing the [cases].” They further assert that the trial court sealed .the cases because the cases “involve[ ] minor children and embarrassment or irreparable harm could occur.” No party has provided this court with transcripts of any hearings before the trial court.

The father filed his mandamus petition on December 2, 2016. In that petition, he first seeks review of the trial court’s October 3, 2016, order denying his motion to dismiss the maternal stepgrandfather and the paternal stepgrandmother from the actions because, he contends, they are not grandparents as defined in § 30-3-4.2(a)(1) and therefore lack “standing” to bring the actions. He also seeks review of the trial court’s oral order denying his motion to dismiss count one of the “cross claim”- brought by the guardian ad litem on behalf of the children. Finally, the father seeks review of the trial court’s December 1, 2016, sua sponte order sealing the consolidated cases.

We must first consider whether, insofar as he seeks review of the trial court’s October 3, 2016, order denying his motion to dismiss the maternal stepgrand-father'and the paternal stepgrandmother from the actions, the father has timely invoked our jurisdiction. As we have recently reiterated, “Rule 21(a)(3), Ala. R. App. P., provides that a petition for the writ of mandamus is presumptively timely if it is filed within the period permitted for an appeal of a judgment of the court in which the challenged order was entered.” Ex parte J.B., 223 So.3d 251, 253 (Ala. Civ. App. 2016). The father filed his mandamus petition more than 42 days after the entry of the October 3, 2016, order.

Our inquiry does not end there, however.

“[O]ur supreme court recently determined that, in situations in which a petition for the writ of mandamus challenges the subject-matter jurisdiction of the court in which the challenged interlocutory order was rendered, the petition need not timely invoke the jurisdiction of the appellate court. Ex parte K.R., 210 So.3d 1106, 1112 (Ala. 2016). Instead, relying on the principle that an appellate court may review the- issue of subject-matter jurisdiction regardless of whether that issúe was raised in the trial, court or even on appeal, our supreme court stated that subject-matter jurisdiction could be raised , ex mero motu at any time despite the lack of a timely filed petition invoking the appellate court’s jurisdiction. Ex parte K.R., 210 So.3d at 1112.”

Ex parte J.B., 223 So.3d at 254.

The father contends that he is challenging whether the maternal stepgrandfather and the paternal stepgrandmother have “standing” to bring an action under § 30-3-4.2(a)(1) because they do not fall within the definition of “grandparent” contained in that section. Standing, he correctly states, implicates subject-matter jurisdiction. See Bernals, Inc. v. Kessler-Greystone, LLC, 70 So.3d 315, 319 (Ala. 2011). Therefore, he says, under Ex parte J.B., his failure to timely invoke the jurisdiction of this court is not fatal to his petition insofar as it challenges the October 3, 2016, order denying his motion to dismiss.

We disagree with the father that the maternal stepgrandfather and the paternal stepgrandmother lacked standing to be named as plaintiffs in the consolidated actions. Our supreme court has indicated, in two plurality opinions, that a majority of the supreme court recognized in Ex parte BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP, 159 So.3d 31, 46 (Ala. 2013), that the concept of standing should be confined to public-law cases. See Gardens at Glenlakes Prop. Owners Ass’n, Inc. v. Baldwin Cty. Sewer Serv., LLC, 225 So.3d 47, 53-54 (Ala. 2016), and Jakeman v. Lawrence Grp. Mgmt. Co., LLC, 151 So.3d 1083, 1087-88 (Ala. 2014). As explained in Jakeman, “in private-law cases such questions as whether ‘ “the present plaintiff is ... entitled to a remedy” ’ is “ ‘better addressed through private-law concepts’” such as ‘ “cause-of-action, real-party-in-interest, capacity, intervention, and like concepts.” ’ ” Jakeman, 151 So.3d at 1088 (quoting Ex parte BAC, 159 So.3d at 44-45, quoting in turn 13A Charles Alan Wright, Arthur R. Miller & Edward H. Cooper, Federal Practice and Procedure § 3531 (3d ed. 2008)). We need not decide whether the father’s challenge to the ability of the maternal stepgrandfather and the paternal stepgrandmother to bring a grandparent-visitation action is a challenge to their capacity or a claim that they are not real parties in interest, see Dennis v. Magic City Dodge, Inc., 524 So.2d 616, 618 (Ala. 1988) (quoting 6 C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 1542 (1971)) (“‘[T]he real party in interest principle is a means to identify the person who possesses the right sought to be enforced. Therefore, the term directs attention to whether plaintiff has a significant interest in the particular action he has instituted. By way of contrast, capacity is conceived to be a party’s personal right to litígate.... ’ because a challenge premised on either concept does not implicate the trial court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. See CAG MLG, L.L.C. v. Smelley, 163 So.3d 346, 350 (Ala. 2014) (indicating that capacity does not implicate subject-matter jurisdiction); Ex parte Sterilite Corp. of Alabama, 837 So.2d 815, 819 (Ala. 2002) (stating that “objections based upon an action’s not being prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest can be waived,” which supports the conclusion that the real-party-in-interest issue does not implicate subject-matter jurisdiction, which cannot be waived); see also Hamm v. Norfolk Southern Ry. Co., 52 So.3d 484, 500 (Ala. 2010) (Lyons, J., concurring specially) (“Obviously, an absence of a real party in interest does not implicate subject-matter jurisdiction....”). Because the subject-matter jurisdiction of the trial court is not at issue, the father’s petition is untimely insofar as he seeks review of the October 3, 2016, order denying his motion to dismiss. The father’s petition, insofar as it seeks review of the October 3, 2016, order, is therefore dismissed.

We turn now to the father’s request that this court review the trial court’s oral denial of his motion to dismiss count one of the “cross claim” asserted by the guardian ad litem on behalf of the children. We first recognize that an oral order “ha[s] no lawful field of operation,” Hobbs v. Hobbs, 423 So.2d 878, 879 (Ala. Civ. App. 1982), and therefore that an oral order or judgment is not valid. Bell v. Bell, 509 So.2d 912, 914 (Ala. 1987). Rule 58(a), Ala. R. Civ. P., provides that

“[a] judge may render an order or a judgment: (1) by executing a separate written document, (2) by including the order or judgment in a judicial opinion, (3) by endorsing upon a motion the words ‘granted,’ ‘denied,’ ‘moot,’* or words of similar import, and dating and signing or initialing it, (4) by making or causing to be made a notation in the court records, or (5) by executing and transmitting an electronic document to the electronic-filing system.”

As our supreme court has'explained, “Rule 58(a) requires, in each instance, a writtfen memorialization by the judge of his or her rendition of the order or judgment in question. Stated otherwise, Rule 58(a) does not allow for an oral rendition of a judgment or order.” Ex parte Chamblee, 899 So.2d 244, 248 (Ala. 2004); see also Meek v. Meek, 54 So.3d 389, 393 (Ala. Civ. App. 2010). Because no lawful or valid order of the trial court has been rendered or entered regarding the father’s motion to dismiss the guardian ad litem’s “cross claim,” the father has no order from which to seek relief. We therefore deny the father’s petition insofar as he seeks relief from the trial court’s oral denial of his motion to dismiss count one of’ the “cross claim” asserted by the guardian ad litem on behalf of the children.

Finally, we consider the father’s argument that the trial court’s December 1, 2016, order sealing the consolidated cases was improperly entered. The materials before us demonstrate, and the parties agree, that no motion seeking to seal any document in the record was presented to the trial court. In addition, the parties agree that no hearing was held on the question of sealing the record before the trial court entered its December 1, 2016, order. The respondents argue, generally, that, because no motion was- presented to the trial court, the requirement in Holland v. Eads, 614 So.2d 1012 (Ala. 1993), that the trial court hold a hearing before ordering that a document in a record be sealed has no application to the present case. Furthermore, the guardian ad litem contends that, if the trial court had held a hearing, it would have sealed the. cases and, therefore, that any error in not holding the hearing required by Holland was harmless. See Rule 45, Ala. R. App. P. The maternal grandmother and maternal step-grandfather also contend that the trial court had ample reason to seal the record and that it discussed its decision to seal the cases in a December 2, 2016, hearing; however,, as noted above, we have no transcript of any hearing held before the trial court.

“ ‘ “A writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that is available when a trial court has exceeded its discretion. Ex parte Fidelity Bank, 893 So.2d 1116, 1119 (Ala. 2004). A writ of mandamus is ‘appropriate when the petitioner can show (1) a clear legal right to the order sought; (2) an imperative duty upon the respondent to perform, accompanied by a refusal to do so; (3) the lack of another adequate remedy; and (4) the properly invoked jurisdiction of the court.’ Ex parte BOC Group, Inc., 823 So.2d 1270, 1272 (Ala. 2001).” ’ ”

Ex parte Brown, 963 So.2d 604, 606-07 (Ala. 2007) (quoting Ex parte Rawls, 953 So.2d 374, 377 (Ala. 2006), quoting in turn Ex parte Antonucci, 917 So.2d 825, 830 (Ala. 2005)).

We begin our analysis of this issue with the excellent discussion in Holland:

‘“Generally, trials are open to the public. However, public access must be balanced with the effect on the parties.’ Ex parte Balogun, 516 So.2d 606, 610 (Ala. 1987). Nevertheless, the decision concerning access ;to the court records has long been recognized as within the trial court’s discretion. Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 689, 98 S.Ct. 1306, 55 L.Ed.2d 570 (1978). This does not mean that the trial court’s discretion should be unfettered; rather,-it should be governed by legal rules and standards, - ■ '
“The United States Supreme Court has recognized a common law right of public access to judicial records. Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 98 S.Ct. 1306, 55 L.Ed.2d 570 (1978). ‘“It is clear that the courts of this country recognize a general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents.”’ United States v. Criden, 648 F.2d 814, 819 (3d Cir. 1981), quoting Nixon, supra, 435 U.S. at 597, 98 S.Ct. at 1312. In fact, this right of the public to inspect and copy judicial records antedates the United States Constitution. Criden, supra.
“It has long been the rule of this State to' allow public inspection of judicial records. Brewer v. Watson, 61 Ala. 310, 311 (1878). More than a century ago, this Court held that ‘[a]n inspection of the records of judicial proceedings kept in the courts of the country, is held to be the right of any citizen.’ Id. at 311; see also Ex parte Balogun, 516 So.2d 606, 612 (Ala. 1987) (holding that ‘the public generally has a right of reasonable inspection of public records required by law to be kept, except where inspection is merely out of curiosity or speculation or where it unduly interferes with the public official’s' ability to perform his duties’); Excise Comm’n of Citronelle v. State ex rel. Skinner, 179 Ala. 654, 657, 60 So. 812, 813 (1912). The public’s right to inspect court records derives from the ‘universal policy underlying the judicial systems of this country [that] secrecy in the exercise of judicial power ... is not tolerable or justifiable.’ Jackson v. Mobley, 157 Ala. 408, 411-12, 47 So. 590, 592 (1908).
“In addition to a common law presumption of permitting public inspection of judicial records, which has been recognized by the United States Supreme Court and by this Court, public access to court records is permitted by statute. Ala. Code 1975, § 36-12-40, grants the public the right to inspect and copy ‘public writings/' which term has been interpreted to include judicial records. Ex parte Balogun, supra; Stone v. Consolidated Publishing Co., 404 So.2d 678, 681 (Ala. 1981) (interpreting a ‘public writing’ to be ‘a record as is reasonably necessary to record the business and activities required to ¡be done or carried on by a public officer so that the' status and condition of such business and activities can be known by our citizens’); State ex rel. Kernells v. Ezell, 291 Ala. 440, 442-43, 282 So.2d 266, 268 (1973) (holding that records of the office of the probate judge are ‘public writings’ within the meaning of the predecessor to § 36-12-40 and are ‘free for examination [by] all persons, whether interested in the same or not’); Excise Comm’n of Citronelle, supra; Brewer, supra.
“Limitations of the public’s right to inspect ‘must be strictly construed and must be applied only in those cases where it is readily apparent that disclosure will result in undue harm or embarrassment to an individual, or where the public interest will clearly be adversely affected, when weighed against the public policy considerations suggesting disclosure.’ Chambers v. Birmingham News Co., 552 So.2d 854, 856 (Ala. 1989). The party refusing disclosure bears the bur den of ‘proving that the writings or records sought are within an exception and warrant nondisclosure of them.’ Chambers, at 856-57; Ex parte CUNA Mutual Ins. Society, 507 So.2d 1328, 1329-(Ala. 1987); Ex parte McMahan, 507 So.2d 492, 493 (Ala. 1987). This Court has held that the following, types of records do not warrant disclosure: ‘[recorded information received by a public officer in confidence, sensitive personnel records, pending criminal investigations, and records the disclosure of- which would be. detrimental to the best interests of the .public.’ Stone, 404 So.2d at 681.
“Most other courts that- have addressed- this issue have recognized a similar presumption of a right of public access to judicial proceedings and records and have placed, .the burden on the party seeking secrecy. Brown v. Advantage Engineering, Inc., 960 F.2d 1013 (11th Cir. 1992); Rushford v. New Yorker Magazine, Inc., 846 F.2d 249, 253 (4th Cir. 1988); Bank of America National Trust and Sav. Ass’n v. Hotel Rittenhouse Associates, 800 F.2d 339, 343 (3d Cir. 1986); Brown & Williamson Tobacco Com. v. F.T.C., 710 F.2d 1165, 1179 (6th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1100, 104 S.Ct. 1595, 80 L.Ed.2d 127 (1984); In re National Broadcasting Co., 653 F.2d 609, 613 (D.C. Cir. 1981); Barron v. Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc., 531 So.2d 113, 118 (Fla. 1988).
“The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit holds that the trial court must apply a balancing test in determining whether to seal a record, ‘ “weighing the competing interests of preserving the district court’s authority in. encouraging settlement agreements and the public’s right to access to public trials” ’ and records. Brown v. Advantage Engineering, Inc., supra, at 1015, quoting Wilson v. American Motors Corp., 759 F.2d 1568, 1569 (11th Cir. 1985).
“The Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit also recognizes a public right of access to judicial records. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., supra. The Sixth Circuit has noted that few reasons warrant closure of public records. Id. The court indicated that some of these reasons include a defendant’s right-to a fair trial, certain privacy rights of participants or third parties, trade secrets, and national security. Id.
“The Court' of Appeals for the Third Circuit holds that, in balancing the factors for and against access, the interest in settling disputes does not outweigh the common law presumption of open access to court documents and orders. Bank of America National Trust, supra.
“We have examined the different approaches used in other jurisdictions. In light of the public policy in favor of public access and the prevailing analysis of this presumption in most American courts, we hold that if a motion to seal is filed, then the trial court shall conduct a hearing. The trial court shall not seal court records except upon a written finding that the moving party has proved by clear and convincing evidence that the information contained in the document sought to be sealed:
“(1) constitutes a trade secret or other confidential commercial research or information; see Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., supra, at 1179; or
“(2) is a matter of national security; see Barron, supra, at 118; or
“(3) promotes scandal or defamation; or
“(4) pertains to wholly private family matters, such as divorce, child custody, or adoption; see Warner, supra; Balogun, supra; Holcombe v. State ex rel. Chandler, 240 Ala. 590, 200 So. 739 (1941); or
“(5) poses a serious threat of harassment, exploitation, physical intrusion, or other particularized' harm to the parties to the action; or
“(6) poses the potential for harm to third persons not parties to the litigation.
“If any one of the above criteria is satisfied, then the trial court may seal the record, or any part of the record, before trial, during trial, or even after a verdict has been reached.
“This approach limits, but does not abolish, the range of judicial discretion. There is a presumption in favor of openness, which can be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence that an individual’s privacy interest (as set out above) rises above the public interest in access.”

Holland, 614 So.2d at. 1013-16 (final two emphases added).

The December 1, 2016, order sealing the consolidated cases contains no written findings indicating that the entire record in the consolidated cases warrants such an extreme measure. The wholesale sealing of an entire record is by its nature overbroad. See Duck Head Apparel Co. v. Hoots, 659 So.2d 897, 916 (Ala. 1995). Furthermore, the trial court failed to hold a hearing at which the parties could argue their respective positions on the sealing issue. See Ex parte Birmingham News Co., 624 So.2d 1117, 1122 (Ala. 1993) (requiring a trial court to hold a hearing on its sua sponte “gag” order in a criminal prosecution). Accordingly, we grant the father’s petition insofar as it challenges the December 1, 2016, order sealing the consolidated cases in their entirety.

We' reiterate: “Limitations of the public’s right to inspect ‘must be strictly construed and must be applied only in those cases where it is readily apparent that disclosure will result in undue harm or embarrassment to an individual, or where the public interest will clearly be adversely affected, when weighed against the public policy considerations suggesting disclosure.”’ Holland, 614 So.2d at 1016 (quoting Chambers v. Birmingham News Co., 552 So.2d 854, 856 (Ala. 1989)). Although no party brought a motion seeking to seal any part of the record, we conclude that, under Holland, a trial court considering whether to seal documents must hold a hearing at which the parties may present arguments regarding the necessity of sealing specific parts of the record. Any order sealing any portion of the record must contain written findings in compliance with Holland that clear and convincing evidence supports a conclusion that the relevant “privacy interest (as set out [in Holland]) rises above the public interest in access.” Holland, 614 So.2d at 1016.

PETITION DISMISSED IN PART, DENIED IN PART, AND GRANTED IN PART; WRIT ISSUED.

Thompson, P. J., and Pittman, Moore, and Donaldson, JJ., concur.

      . We note that Rule 13(g), Ala. R. Civ. P., provides that' "[a] pleading may state as a cross-claim any claim by one patty against a co-party, arising out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter either of the original action or of a counterclaim therein or relating to any property that is the subject matter of the original action.” The materials before this court do not demonstrate that the children are parties to the consolidated actions. '

      . The paternal grandfather and paternal step-grandmother did not file an answer to the father’s petition.

      . We note that a trial court could enter a sua sponte order temporarily sealing a document pending the required hearing. See, e.g., In re FiberMark, Inc., 330 B.R. 480, 496 (Bankr. D. Vt. 2005). However, as explained in In re FiberMark, at the hearing "the posture of [the case at the time of the hearing would be] the same as the posture of a request to seal an unsealed document,” 330 B.R. at 496, and any party wishing to seal the document would have the burden under Holland to establish “by clear and convincing evidence that [his or her] privacy interest (as set out [in Holland]) rises above the public interest in access.” Holland, 614 So.2d at 1016.


text:
    James E. THOMAS, Jr. v. STATE
    CR-12-1864
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/13/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Jimmy B. RODRIQUEZ v. STATE
    CR-12-2123
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Charles Vincent PRATT v. STATE
    CR-13-0057
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/01/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    William Jody BYRD v. STATE
    CR-13-0559
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Costillo Arteen JOHNSON v. STATE
    CR-13-0999
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied. 06/17/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    T.E.M., JR. v. STATE
    CR-14-0186
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Tivon Rollie THOMAS v. STATE
    CR-14-0228
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Jerome Thaddeus JACKSON v. STATE
    CR-14-0312
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Gregory SMITH v. STATE
    CR-14-0371
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Rickey Deronte CROOKS v. STATE
    CR-14-0389
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Damien Frederick GREENE v. STATE
    CR-14-0464
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Patrick Jason NORRIS v. STATE
    CR-14-0465
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Andy C. NOWELL v. STATE
    CR-14-0567
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Anthony Ray BATTLE v. STATE
    CR-14-0571
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Stalandus Z. SLAUGHTER v. STATE
    CR-14-0572
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Robert Albert GRIFFIN v. STATE
    CR-14-0594
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
    Reh. denied 06/17/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Kennith Earl GEORGE v. STATE
    CR-14-0615
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Antoine Gene DAVENPORT v. STATE
    CR-14-0696
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Bryon Keith HOYLE v. STATE
    CR-14-0706
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Jessie Junior ALLEN v. STATE
    CR-14-0716
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    James Christopher MARTIN v. STATE
    CR-14-0722
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh, denied.


text:
    Ularius H.S. JOHNSON v. STATE
    CR-14-0784
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/10/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    Derrick ALLEN v. STATE
    CR-14-0790
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    JISUN YUN v. STATE
    CR-14-0821
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Gary Dewayne WOODS v. STATE
    CR-14-0893
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 06/17/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Billy Ray RICHARDSON v. STATE
    CR-14-0912
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/23/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    Robert Allen CLEM v. STATE
    CR-14-0925
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Jason Lee CAMPBELL v. STATE
    CR-14-1003
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    George BLACKMON v. STATE
    CR-14-1010
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Alexander Terrell MURPHY v. STATE
    CR-14-1017
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    B.W.G. and K.R. v. STATE
    CR-14-1025
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    DeAngelo DeWayne MORRIS v. STATE
    CR-14-1029
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Gerald Ingram BARROW, Sr. v. STATE
    CR-14-1068
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Kevin SAFFOLD v. STATE
    CR-14-1069
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Joyce Hardin GARRARD v. STATE
    CR-14-1072
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/27/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    Darryl J. DIXON v. STATE
    CR-14-1078
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Calvin Tyrone FINCHER v. STATE
    CR-14-1079
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Andrew OSBORNE v. STATE
    CR-14-1104
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Daoud BOONE v. STATE
    CR-14-1110
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Jarvis Demarko HILL v. STATE
    CR-14-1116
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Mary WIGGINS v. STATE
    CR-14-1125
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/13/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Curtis CALDWELL v. STATE
    CR-14-1126
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Scottie Eugene PAULEY v. STATE
    CR-14-1139
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Timothy WILLIAMS v. STATE
    CR-14-1157
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Leon CAVER v. STATE
    CR-14-1171
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Tareka Green STODDART v. STATE
    CR-14-1176
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Devon Gilbert BURLINGHAM v. STATE
    CR-14-1183
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/08/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Cody Lee COMPTON v. STATE
    CR-14-1190
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Angela Deniece TURNER v. STATE
    CR-14-1200
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Donald PEARCE v. STATE
    CR-14-1202
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Vincent Lovelace LOWE v. STATE
    CR-14-1239
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Eric DARBY v. STATE
    CR-14-1269
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Everett Bernard MORTON v. STATE
    CR-14-1296
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Andrae STALLWORTH v. STATE
    CR-14-1314
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/27/2016
   Affirmed,


text:
    Tiffany Danielle ANDREWS v. STATE
    CR-14-1331
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
    Reh. denied 06/17/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Dorian JONES v. STATE
    CR-14-1334
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    William Barrett SLADE II v. STATE
    CR-14-1341
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Demarcus Antonio KENT v. STATE
    CR-14-1347
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Kenneth Winston DIAL v. STATE
    CR-14-1369
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Robert FITTS v. STATE
    CR-14-1377
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Jarvis Felix TERRY v. STATE
    CR-14-1379
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    K.F.R. v. STATE
    CR-14-1383
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Jerry Jamaine COBB v. STATE
    CR-14-1385
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Stephen Fredrick BROWN v. STATE
    CR-14-1395
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Robert PRESLEY v. STATE
    CR-14-1396
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    B.V.B v. STATE
    CR-14-1412
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh, denied.


text:
    Justin Jammall DEES v. STATE
    CR-14-1415
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Davon Lashon DAVIS v. STATE
    CR-14-1417
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Richard Daron KENNEDY
    CR-14-1418
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/04/2016
    Reh. denied 05/09/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    T.T.H. v. STATE
    CR-14-1426
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Jordan Manuel KEENER v. STATE
    CR-14-1432
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Christopher Lee TURO v. STATE
    CR-14-1446
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Deandre BONNER v. STATE
    CR-14-1460
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    Larry Mize HENSLEY v. STATE
    CR-14-1464
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Gregory KELLEY v. STATE
    CR-14-1468
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Jessica GILBERT v. STATE
    CR-14-1472
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    C.S. v. STATE
    CR-14-1478
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Jimmie Korea DAVIS v. STATE
    CR-14-1495
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Michael Arthur MOODY v. CITY OF MONTGOMERY
    CR-14-1509
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/04/2016
    Reh. denied 05/24/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    Shawn MCCLAIN v. STATE
    CR-14-1522
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Antavis Davon MILLS v. STATE
    CR-14-1534
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Sylvester LEGGETT v. STATE
    CR-14-1536
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Charles Randolph Brown WATSON v. STATE
    CR-14-1541
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
    Reh. denied 06/17/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Conrad Richard GREEN v. STATE
    CR-14-1543
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Jack Aaron ALLRED v. STATE
    CR-14-1548
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/21/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    Christopher Lynn BURGE v. CITY OF FLORENCE
    CR-14-1554
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Byron WALKER v. STATE
    CR-14-1560
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
    Reh. denied 06/17/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    David Scott INGRAM v. STATE
    CR-14-1596
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Shaina Michelle RAJPUT v. STATE
    CR-14-1597
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Trace Lakith FULPHER v. STATE
    CR-14-1598
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Roderick Joseph TATE v. STATE
    CR-14-1603
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Gregory Arnaz CHISHOLM v. STATE
    CR-14-1610
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Chase Andrew DUNN v. STATE
    CR-14-1617
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    David Thomas HARRISON v. STATE
    CR-14-1618
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    R.S. v. STATE
    CR-14-1647
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/04/2016
   Transferred to Jefferson Cir. Ct.


text:
    Christopher Lawrence FARRO v. STATE
    CR-14-1655
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    STATE v. Charles Richard TOOLEY
    CR-14-1668
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Ladarrin MCCALL v. STATE
    CR-14-1670
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    Adam E. KIRKLEY v. STATE
    CR-14-1676
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Fredrick CRENSHAW v. STATE
    CR-14-1682
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Willie BUFORD v. STATE
    CR-14-1688
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/27/2016
   Affirmed,


text:
    Frankie C. PICKETT v. STATE
    CR-14-1690
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Montay Decarlos HODGE v. STATE
    CR-14-1699
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Barth Henri WILLIAMS v. STATE
    CR-14-1711
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Ashley Noel LEWIS v. STATE
    CR-14-1727
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Jonathan Maurice SMITH v. STATE
    CR-14-1730
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    John HINTON v. STATE
    CR-14-1735
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Reginald Lenoir HOLT
    CR-14-1740
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/27/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    James MCCONICO, Jr. v. STATE
    CR-14-1747
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Raymond ALLEN v. STATE
    CR-14-1749
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/20/2016
   Reversed and remanded.


text:
    M.T.L. v. STATE
    CR-14-1765
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Marquise Deshawn CAWTHORN v. STATE
    CR-15-0022
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Soyica COLVIN v. STATE
    CR-15-0025
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Alex James LEE v. STATE
    CR-15-0026
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Richard Lamar BOLDEN v. STATE
    CR-15-0034
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Shannon Ray JOHNSON v. STATE
    CR-15-0052
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    C.C.L. v. STATE
    CR-15-0055
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 06/10/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    R.D.M. v. STATE
    CR-15-0057
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Charles DIXON
    CR-15-0059
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/13/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    Mickey Lee MANN v. STATE
    CR-15-0062
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Michael W. HAMILTON v. STATE
    CR-15-0073
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    William Robert WILLIAMSON v. STATE
    CR-15-0074
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
    Reh. denied 06/17/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    William Lee BAILEY v. STATE
    CR-15-0080
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Matthew Joseph BREWER v. STATE
    CR-15-0082
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Zachery THIGPEN v. STATE
    CR-15-0083
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Quincey PEOPLES
    CR-15-0092
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/27/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    Richard Joseph HOLLINGSWORTH v. STATE
    CR-15-0096
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Jose ALVARO-CARPIYO v. STATE
    CR-15-0103
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
    Reh. denied 06/17/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Rashad LEE v. STATE
    CR-15-0104
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    DONG JIN SUH v. STATE
    CR-15-0106
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Christopher Antonio JACKSON v. STATE
    CR-15-0112
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Ollie Borwn ORR III v. STATE
    CR-15-0115
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/11/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    Walter Terrance MILES v. STATE
    CR-15-0118
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    John E. FEY v. STATE
    CR-15-0119
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/06/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Johnnie W. JACKS v. STATE
    CR-15-0123
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/08/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Torrence BAILEY v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
    CR-15-0131
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Mfirmed.


text:
    Kerwin Dewayne MACLIN v. STATE
    CR-15-0132
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Mfirmed.


text:
    Tavoriez Marquette TIMMONS v. STATE
    CR-15-0136
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/29/2016
    Reh. denied 05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Floreese Fuqua HODGES v. STATE
    CR-15-0143
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Mark Anthony BARNES, Jr. v. STATE
    CR-15-0144
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Roderick DELAUNE v. STATE
    CR-15-0157
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Gary Lynn SMITH v. STATE
    CR-15-0158
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Robert D. KITCHEN, Jr.
    CR-15-0160
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/13/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    Wendell Jerome SCOTT v. STATE
    CR-15-0162
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/20/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    Emmett Lee GULLEY v. STATE
    CR-15-0173
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/29/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Brian GAUTHIER
    CR-15-0178
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/27/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    T.T.P. v. STATE
    CR-15-0181
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Aubrey Lee WILLIAMS v. STATE
    CR-15-0183
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/19/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    Dijun Aaron WINSTON v. STATE
    CR-15-0186
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Tyler TRUITT v. CITY OF HUNTSVILLE
    CR-15-0187
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Cedric Lamark SCOTT v. STATE
    CR-15-0188
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Antwoine Devon GRAY v. STATE
    CR-15-0189
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Carrol Joe DRISKELL v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
    CR-15-0190
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 06/10/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    William Keith ROBEY v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
    CR-15-0192
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/13/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Larry HARRIS
    CR-15-0196
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/27/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    Richard Lee CARROLL v. STATE
    CR-15-0199
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/13/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Gregory James GOLDSMITH v. STATE
    CR-15-0208
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/29/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    John David RAKESTRAW, Jr. v. STATE
    CR-15-0212
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Denarieya L. SMITH
    CR-15-0214
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/27/2016
   Habeas corpus pet. stricken.


text:
    Kahlif Miguel COOPER v. STATE
    CR-15-0217
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Joseph PATTERSON v. STATE
    CR-15-0218
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Woodburck NOE
    CR-15-0220
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/27/2016
   Transferred to Ct. of Civ. App.


text:
    Nathan Dewel LOTT v. STATE
    CR-15-0222
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Mark Anthony JEWELL v. STATE
    CR-15-0224
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
    Reh. denied 06/24/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Arthur BELCHER v. STATE
    CR-15-0230
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Larry Earl RENO
    CR-15-0235
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/27/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    Matthew Shane SULLIVAN v. STATE
    CR-15-0237
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 5/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Bernandize Mortez ELLIOTT v. STATE
    CR-15-0239
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Keldrick DOBYNE, Jr. v. STATE
    CR-15-0241
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Billy C. BOWENS
    CR-15-0245
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
    Reh. denied 05/12/2016
   Petition for writ of prohibition dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Floyd SMITH
    CR-15-0247
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    Ernest Jerome GREEN v. STATE
    CR-15-0250
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Matlando WEST v. STATE
    CR-15-0254
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
    Reh. denied 06/10/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Cedric Dale JOHNSON
    CR-15-0256
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    James Thomas STIMPSON v. STATE
    CR-15-0262
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Anthony Lee RAINEY v. STATE
    CR-15-0266
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Jeffery Lee THOMAS
    CR-15-0267
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    Marvin Eugene WOODEN v. STATE
    CR-15-0270
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Darrell Bernard EATON, Jr. v. STATE
    CR-15-0271
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Richard Edward GLOVER
    CR-15-0274
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    Jihad Abdun RAUF v. STATE
    CR-15-0278
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Charles Auther  MOORE v. STATE
    CR-15-0279
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016

       (Although this case is docketed as indicated, the unpublished memorandum issued by the Court of Criminal Appeals indicates that this defendant’s name is Charles Arthur Moore.)

   Affirmed.


text:
    Timothy Roy WALLACE v. STATE
    CR-15-0280
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Raymond BROOKS v. STATE
    CR-15-0284
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
    Reh. denied 6/17/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Damien Sharell HOWARD v. STATE
    CR-15-0291
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Dale Reginald SMITH
    CR-15-0299
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/13/2016
   Transferred to Coneeuh Cir. Ct.


text:
    EX PARTE Nicholas WELLS
    CR-15-0303
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    R.A.M. v. STATE
    CR-15-0304
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/29/2016
   Transferred to Talladega Cir. Ct.


text:
    EX PARTE Kevin PRINCE
    CR-15-0307
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    Jesse James BROOKS v. ALABAMA BOARD OF PARDONS & PAROLES
    CR-15-0310
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/06/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Michael Dewayne MCNUTT v. STATE
    CR-15-0316
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Travis C. MOSELY v. STATE
    CR-15-0318
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Maurice N. CAVER v. STATE
    CR-15-0319
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Correy Deangelo GOFFER v. STATE
    CR-15-0320
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
    Reh. denied 06/17/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Phillip Ray MENEFEE
    CR-15-0327
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/20/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    Jessie James MORRIS v. STATE
    CR-15-0338
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/29/2016
    Reh. denied 05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Britney Reshaun THOMAS v. STATE
    CR-15-0340
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Robert Shannon CARSWELL v. STATE
    CR-15-0341
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Willie Bernard COLLINS
    CR-15-0343
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/13/2016
   Petition for writ of prohibition dismissed.


text:
    Perry MILLER v. STATE
    CR-15-0346
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Brantley Djon FORD v. STATE
    CR-15-0352
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/23/2016
   Reversed and remanded.


text:
    Everette James SMITH v. STATE
    CR-15-0357
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Jeremy Lawrence BAKER v. STATE
    CR-15-0359
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Wayne Anthony AGEE v. STATE
    CR-15-0363
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 5/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    James Calvin FRAZIER v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
    CR-15-0364
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Glen Frederick TAYLOR v. STATE
    CR-15-0374
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/24/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Corey HENDERSON v. STATE
    CR-15-0376
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Gregory Lakeith HUFFMAN
    CR-15-0379
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/04/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Ricky Dewayne BOOTH
    CR-15-0399
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Mand. pet,, dismissed.


text:
    Clifton KING v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
    CR-15-0410
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/08/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Jimmy Lee WEBB
    CR-15-0413
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    Garry Cleve KRAFT v. STATE
    CR-15-0415
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/06/2016
    Reh. denied 04/29/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Richard Scott SMITH
    CR-15-0419
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE William SELTZER, Jr.
    CR-15-0420
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Christopher L. LEWIS
    CR-15-0421
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/04/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Michael A. MOODY
    CR-15-0423
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/13/2016
    Reh. denied 06/30/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Christopher BRASEALE
    CR-15-0424
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/27/2016
   Transferred to Marshall Cir. Ct.


text:
    Thomas Edward JONES v. STATE
    CR-15-0431
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
    Reh. denied 06/17/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Eric JAMES
    CR-15-0432
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/13/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Jason Jermaine HALL
    CR-15-0434
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/13/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    Anthony GOLSTON v. STATE
    CR-15-0451
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Joel David ESCALERA v. STATE
    CR-15-0456
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Quentin TRUSS v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
    CR-15-0457
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Andre D. JONES
    CR-15-0459
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/13/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    William TOLBERT v. ALABAMA BOARD OF PARDONS & PAROLES
    CR-15-0463
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Tommy J. BOLDIN
    CR-15-0474
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/13/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    Stephanie NELSON v. STATE
    CR-15-0477
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
    Reh. denied 06/17/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Frederick CARTER
    CR-15-0482
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/20/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Melvin GRAHAM
    CR-15-0485
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/20/2016
   Transferred to Ct. of Civ. App.


text:
    EX PARTE Stephen Antonio DEJARNETTE
    CR-15-0488
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/27/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Dejuan SIGLER
    CR-15-0489
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/04/2016
   Mand, pet. dismissed.


text:
    Leonard SEAY v. STATE
    CR-15-0490
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Carlos Demond HAMPTON v. STATE
    CR-15-0500
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Corey FERRELL v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
    CR-15-0501
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
    Reh. denied 05/13/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Lambert Marcel MITCHELL v. STATE
    CR-15-0504
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
    Reh. denied 06/24/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE James Jeffrey CAINE
    CR-15-0506
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/27/2016
   Mand. pet. stricken.


text:
    Joseph WEST v. STATE
    CR-15-0508
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/20/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    Peter SHEPPARD, Jr. v. STATE
    CR-15-0509
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Derrick L. WILLIAMS
    CR-15-0512
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    Ambrose S. CLARK v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
    CR-15-0516
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Cedric Dale JOHNSON v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
    CR-15-0520
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/22/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Anthony GRADY v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
    CR-15-0523
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Dustin Mitchell PIERCE v. STATE
    CR-15-0526
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/05/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Thomas Wesley SMITH
    CR-15-0528
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/20/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Anthony R. MCKEE
    CR-15-0529
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/20/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    Curtis J. COOK, Jr. v. STATE
    CR-15-0530
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    Jerry Eugene MAYNARD v. STATE
    CR-15-0535
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    Anthony L. BROWN v. STATE
    CR-15-0539
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Orrin MARABLE
    CR-15-0544
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Keith Lydell MARKS
    CR-15-0545
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/04/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Charles SULLIVAN
    CR-15-0548
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/13/2016
    Reh. denied 04/20/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    John Tyler ANDERSON v. STATE
    CR-15-0550
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/20/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    Michael Tyson LEE v. STATE
    CR-15-0555
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/20/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    Steve Christopher LAWRENCE v. STATE
    CR-15-0558
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Walter MAUL
    CR-15-0559
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Henry Clay SMITH III
    CR-15-0560
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/04/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Kelandus CONSENTA
    CR-15-0566
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/04/2016
   Mand, pet. stricken.


text:
    EX PARTE Rey ROSARIO
    CR-15-0571
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/13/2016
   Mand. pet, dismissed.


text:
    Marcus Pierre JACKSON v. STATE
    CR-15-0572
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/24/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Demetrius JORDAN
    CR-15-0573
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/13/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Gregory PEOPLES
    CR-15-0574
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/04/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    Tony WILLIAMS v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
    CR-15-0578
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/20/2016
    Reh. denied 06/17/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    D.G. v. STATE
    CR-15-0585
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/20/2016
   .Transferred to Walker Cir. Ct.


text:
    EX PARTE Woodburck NOE
    CR-15-0592
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Transferred to Ct. of Civ. App.


text:
    Dennis WINBORN v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
    CR-15-0593
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Earl W. SANDERS
    CR-15-0596
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/28/2016
   Habeas corpus pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Terry ARMSTRONG
    CR-15-0598
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/09/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Thomas J. GRIDER
    CR-15-0603
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/09/2016
    Reh. denied 05/20/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Harlan PRITCHETT
    CR-15-0604
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/02/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Gary Wayne PRESLEY
    CR-15-0605
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/13/2016
   Transferred to Shelby Cir. Ct.


text:
    Lorenzo Norris HARRIS v. STATE
    CR-15-0608
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/13/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Erskine L. SPEARMAN
    CR-15-0611
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/13/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    Patrick Allen STANTON v. STATE
    CR-15-0625
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Affirmed.


text:
    EX PARTE Frank James CARTER
    CR-15-0630
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/13/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Jordan GREENHILL
    CR-15-0632
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/25/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Robert J. PERRY
    CR-15-0633
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/09/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    Larry Dale WRIGHT v. STATE
    CR-15-0651
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/13/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Arlon Melvin MILLS, Jr.
    CR-15-0652
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/02/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Clyde ANDERSON, Jr.
    CR-15-0653
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    6/13/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Alma Toler GUNTER
    CR-15-0658
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/09/2016
   Mand. pet. stricken.


text:
    EX PARTE Jonathan J. MOORER
    CR-15-0660
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/01/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Eddie MICKENS
    CR-15-0662
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/27/2016
   Transferred to Jefferson Cir. Ct.


text:
    EX PARTE Christopher BRASEALE
    CR-15-0675
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/27/2016
   Transferred to Limestone Cir. Ct.


text:
    Rasbian Maurice WARD v. STATE
    CR-15-0681
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/13/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Tammy Roy COFIELD
    CR-15-0682
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/27/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Jeremy MORGAN
    CR-15-0688
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/13/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Jason HENSLEY
    CR-15-0691
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/27/2016
   Transferred to Jackson Cir. Ct.


text:
    EX PARTE Christopher BRASEALE
    CR-15-0692
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/27/2016
   Transferred to Marshall Cir. Ct.


text:
    EX PARTE Leonardo A. WYNN
    CR-15-0700
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/13/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Michael Wayne HART
    CR-15-0701
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/09/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Melvin R. BUSH
    CR-15-0703
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/09/2016
    Reh. denied 05/20/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE STARSKY V. KING v. STATE
    CR-15-0704
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/09/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Terry Donnell WATSON
    CR-15-0706
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/09/2016
   Mand. pet. stricken.


text:
    EX PARTE James Calvin FRAZIER
    CR-15-0717
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/09/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Danny L. SMITH
    CR-15-0732
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/30/2016
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    Ulanda Tyrone MOON v. STATE
    CR-15-0733
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/27/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Leon E. JACKSON
    CR-15-0736
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/30/2016
   Transferred to Lauderdale Cir. Ct.


text:
    Kenneth CROZIER v. STATE
    CR-15-0738
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/24/2016
   Reh. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE Dennis Wayne WHITE
    CR-15-0742
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    06/30/2016
   Transferred to Winston Cir. Ct.


text:
    Alveno METCALF v. STATE
    CR-15-0745
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/15/2016
    Reh. denied 04/28/2016
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Carlos Edward KENNEDY
    CR-15-0775
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    04/14/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Terry RIVERS
    CR-15-0780
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    05/25/2016
    Reh. denied 06/03/2016
   Mand. pet. dismissed.