Burnsed v. City of Evergreen

Summary

The Alabama Supreme Court held that the Court of Criminal Appeals improperly dismissed Burnsed’s direct appeal from a municipal DUI conviction because the municipal-court transcript constituted an adequate record. The court concluded that municipal courts are not authorized to appoint official court reporters, and that the absence of such an appointment did not invalidate the transcript where the defendant waived a jury trial and the City did not object to the transcript’s use. The dismissal was reversed and the case remanded for reinstatement of the appeal.

Holdings

1. A defendant's failure to show that a municipal-court transcript was prepared by a person officially appointed by the trial court is not a valid basis for dismissing a direct appeal because municipal courts are not authorized or required to appoint official court reporters in the manner provided for circuit and district courts.
2. Burnsed satisfied Rule 30.2(1) because he waived his right to a jury trial and the record contained an adequate transcript of the municipal-court proceedings; the absence of an objection by the City to the reporter or transcript supported its use on appeal.
3. Parker v. City of Tuscaloosa is overruled to the extent it conflicts with the Supreme Court's holding that the lack of an officially appointed municipal-court reporter is not a ground for dismissing an otherwise proper appeal.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Court of Criminal Appeals properly dismissed Burnsed's direct appeal because he failed to show that the municipal-court transcript had been prepared by a court reporter officially appointed by the trial court.
2. Whether a transcript of municipal-court proceedings recorded by a privately hired court reporter constituted an adequate record under Rule 30.2(1), Alabama Rules of Criminal Procedure, when the defendant waived a jury trial and the opposing municipality did not object to the transcript.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded