Alabama Supreme Court: Five Latest Decisions Are Certiorari Denials, Not New Merits Precedent
Each is a certificate of judgment denying a petition for writ of certiorari without opinion.
The Court’s five latest available entries are all dated July 10, 2026. Each is a certificate of judgment denying a petition for writ of certiorari without opinion.
That makes this a finality docket, not a new-doctrine docket. The orders end Supreme Court review in the individual matters and leave the underlying appellate dispositions in place, but they do not explain the Court’s reasoning, resolve a new legal issue, or create a new Supreme Court precedent.
The five latest entries
Case
Supreme Court docket
Lower court identified in the certificate
July 10 action
SC-2026-0471
Mobile Circuit Court CC-16-6799.61; Court of Criminal Appeals CR-2025-0427
Writ denied; no opinion; certificate of judgment issued
SC-2026-0369
Calhoun Circuit Court CV-25-900033; Court of Civil Appeals CL-2025-0533
Writ denied; no opinion; certificate of judgment issued
SC-2026-0445
Montgomery Circuit Court CC-21-395.60; Court of Criminal Appeals CR-2025-0624
Writ denied; no opinion; certificate of judgment issued
SC-2026-0447
Dallas Circuit Court CC-77-341.62; Court of Criminal Appeals CR-2025-0850
Writ denied; no opinion; certificate of judgment issued
SC-2026-0421
Jefferson Circuit Court CC-02-2899.63; Court of Criminal Appeals CR-2025-0747
Writ denied; no opinion; certificate of judgment issued
What a no-opinion certiorari denial does—and does not—do
The July 10 orders show that the Court considered each petition and declined discretionary review. They do not state why review was denied. A denial therefore should not be characterized as the Supreme Court’s endorsement of every rationale in the Court of Criminal Appeals or Court of Civil Appeals decision below.
Equally important, these certificates are not opinions on the underlying criminal or civil claims. The public entries identify the originating trial and intermediate appellate docket numbers, but do not disclose the offense, civil cause of action, arguments raised in the petitions, or the legal analysis in the lower appellate rulings. Practitioners should obtain and analyze the underlying Court of Appeals disposition and certiorari papers before advising a client about the substantive effect of any individual denial.
The immediate procedural consequence: Supreme Court review is over
Each July 10 entry is styled as a certificate of judgment. Under Alabama Rule of Appellate Procedure 41, when the Supreme Court denies a petition for certiorari, the certificate of judgment issues immediately. The certificates in these five cases expressly state that the Court’s judgment is certified on July 10 and address costs under Rule 35. Ala. R. App. P. 41.
For the parties, the practical consequence is that the Supreme Court phase has ended. Counsel should then confirm the resulting status in the intermediate appellate court and trial court, assess any further relief potentially available under the governing procedural framework, and communicate the finality consequences promptly to the client.
Criminal appellate practice: four of the five newest entries
Four of the five latest entries—Wilson, Sanders, Brown, and Sawyer—are petitions for certiorari from decisions of the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals.
For criminal practitioners, the recurring reminder is that Supreme Court certiorari is discretionary and tightly framed. In ordinary criminal cases, a rehearing application in the Court of Criminal Appeals is generally a prerequisite to certiorari. The certiorari petition must be filed within 14 days after the Court of Criminal Appeals acts on rehearing and must identify a recognized ground for review, such as a material first-impression question, conflict with specified appellate authority, or a qualifying constitutional or statutory ruling. Ala. R. App. P. 39.
A no-opinion denial underscores a practical point: counsel should develop the certiorari theory before the petition is due, not treat the petition as an opportunity to reargue every assignment of error. The petition must make the Rule 39 ground and the factual basis for it intelligible from the petition materials. When the underlying Court of Criminal Appeals disposition is an unpublished memorandum or lacks an adequate factual account, the statement-of-facts steps taken on rehearing can materially affect the Supreme Court’s ability to evaluate the petition.
Post-denial checklist for criminal counsel
Obtain the Supreme Court certificate of judgment and preserve the lower appellate decision, rehearing materials, and certiorari petition in the client file.
Confirm the Court of Criminal Appeals’ certificate-of-judgment and remand status, if applicable.
Review the disposition to determine what became final: conviction, sentence, postconviction ruling, or other criminal judgment. The Supreme Court certificates alone do not answer that question.
Evaluate any remaining client-specific options under the appropriate procedural rules without representing that a no-opinion certiorari denial itself decided a new substantive issue.
Give the client a clear written finality update that distinguishes the denial of discretionary review from an opinion on the merits.
The civil entry: Ex parte Myers
Ex parte Myers is the sole latest-entry petition from the Court of Civil Appeals. Its certificate identifies a Calhoun Circuit Court case involving the Board of Trustees of the Policemen’s and Firemen’s Retirement Fund, followed by Court of Civil Appeals case CL-2025-0533. The Supreme Court denied the petition without opinion and issued its certificate of judgment.
The same caution applies. The denial establishes that discretionary Supreme Court review will not proceed in that matter; it does not reveal which issue was raised, whether the Court agreed with the Court of Civil Appeals’ analysis, or what substantive proposition the lower decision supports. Attorneys working with the resulting Court of Civil Appeals disposition should assess its precedential status independently and read the decision itself rather than citing the certiorari denial as substantive approval.
Bottom line
The five latest Alabama Supreme Court entries are procedural dispositions issued on one day, not a set of five new merits opinions. They show the endpoint of discretionary review:
all five petitions were denied without opinion;
the Supreme Court certified its judgment the same day; and
the operative substantive analysis, if any, remains in the underlying Court of Criminal Appeals or Court of Civil Appeals decisions.
For appellate practitioners, the useful lesson is disciplined certiorari practice and finality management. Build the Rule 39 ground early, preserve the necessary facts on rehearing, and treat a certiorari denial as an event that ends Supreme Court review—not as a judicial opinion resolving the issues presented.
This article is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice. It summarizes the five latest Alabama Supreme Court entries available before July 17, 2026, as reflected in the linked certificates of judgment and procedural rules.