Ex parte J.F.C. (In re J.F.C. v. City of Daphne)

Summary

The Supreme Court of Alabama held that the evidence was insufficient to sustain J.F.C.'s conviction for criminal surveillance under Alabama Code § 13A-11-32 because the prosecution did not prove secret observation of another person's activities. The court reversed the Court of Criminal Appeals' judgment and remanded for consideration of whether J.F.C. could be adjudicated guilty of attempted criminal surveillance.

Holdings

1. Alabama Code § 13A-11-32, read together with the definition of surveillance in § 13A-11-30(3), requires proof of the secret observation of the activities of another person; mere spying or looking into a residence without evidence that another person's activities were observed does not satisfy the statute.
2. The evidence was insufficient to sustain J.F.C.'s conviction for criminal surveillance because it did not establish that anyone was in the apartment or that J.F.C. observed another person's activities.
3. Because the Court of Criminal Appeals had not addressed the City's alternative argument concerning attempted criminal surveillance, the case was remanded for that court to determine whether J.F.C. should be adjudicated guilty of the attempt offense.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Alabama Code § 13A-11-32 requires proof that the defendant actually observed the activities of another person in order to establish criminal surveillance.
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain J.F.C.'s conviction for criminal surveillance.
3. Whether, if the evidence was insufficient for completed criminal surveillance, the case should be remanded for consideration of attempted criminal surveillance.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded