Walker v. State

Summary

The Alabama Supreme Court held that a defendant may appeal a new sentence imposed after a Rule 32 proceeding vacates an illegal sentence and orders resentencing. Because the trial court determined Walker’s guilt, pronounced a new sentence, and exercised sentencing discretion, a final judgment of conviction existed and the Court of Criminal Appeals had jurisdiction to review the appeal.

Holdings

1. When a Rule 32 court grants relief from an illegal sentence by ordering a new sentencing hearing, it may vacate the sentence without disturbing the underlying conviction and returns jurisdiction over the underlying criminal matter to the trial court for the purpose of conducting a new sentencing hearing and pronouncing a new sentence.
2. A defendant may appeal a new sentence imposed at a sentencing hearing conducted after the circuit court grants Rule 32 relief from an illegal sentence.
3. The Court of Criminal Appeals had jurisdiction to consider Walker's appeal from the new sentence because the trial court entered a judgment of conviction by reaffirming Walker's guilt and pronouncing sentence.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a Rule 32 court's order granting relief from an illegal sentence and ordering a new sentencing hearing returns jurisdiction over the underlying criminal matter to the trial court for resentencing without disturbing the conviction.
2. Whether a defendant may appeal a new sentence imposed after a Rule 32 court grants relief from an illegal sentence.
3. Whether the Court of Criminal Appeals had jurisdiction to review Walker's appeal after the trial court reaffirmed his guilt and pronounced a new sentence.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded