Langford v. State
Alabama Supreme Court
354 So.2d 313 (1977)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Heflin Mack Langford (defendant), who had been drinking, drove his car, sped, lost control of the car, and fatally crashed into a car driven by Randall Holt. It was unclear whether Langford was legally drunk and decided to drive anyway, that he knew he was driving recklessly, or that he did so without regard to the lives he might be endangering. The State of Alabama (plaintiff) chose to prosecute Langford for first-degree murder resulting from universal malice, rather than for second-degree murder or some lesser charge. At the conclusion of the prosecution's evidence, Langford moved for a directed verdict, contending that even if the jury believed that Langford knew he was drunk but nevertheless intentionally drove the car that crashed into Holt's vehicle, this was insufficient to convict Langford of first-degree murder. The judge denied the motion and the jury convicted Langford of first-degree murder. Langford appealed to the Supreme Court of Alabama.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Jones, J.)
Dissent (Maddox, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
