In a case that clarifies the permissibility of concurrent split sentences, the Supreme Court of Alabama recently presided over the case of Ex parte Courtney Rayshun Elston. This case, which originally arose from the Calhoun Circuit Court in Calhoun County, analyzes the relationship between the Split-Sentence Act and other statutorily imposed sentencing guidelines, applying this clarified framework to the question of concurrent split sentences.

In 2010, Courtney Rayshun Elston pled guilty to two charges—murder under §13A-6-2 of the Alabama Code and discharging a firearm into an occupied vehicle under §13A-11-61 of the Alabama Code. Elston was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment for each charge to be served consecutively. Both sentences were split, allowing Elston to serve five years of imprisonment followed by 15 years of probation for each charge. Elston did not appeal the convictions or sentences. In March of 2019, however, Elston’s probation was revoked after the trial court found that Elston had committed first-degree assault during his probationary period. Again, Elston did not appeal the order.

In April 2020, Elston filed a pro se petition arguing that his sentences were illegal. Elston based his argument on the grounds that his 15-year probationary period was excessive and therefore illegal, and that the circuit court could not impose consecutive split sentences. Further, Elston argued that his probation revocation was based on hearsay evidence alone and could not be sustained. In response, the State argued that Elston’s claims were precluded, insufficiently plead, and meritless. The trial court denied Elston’s petition on May 26, 2022, leading Elston to appeal to the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment. Accordingly, Elston filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Alabama Supreme Court.

The Alabama Supreme Court granted Elston’s petition to review whether Alabama law permits consecutive split sentences, along with Elston’s other claims. The Court reviewed Elston’s arguments with respect to the Split-Sentence Act, codified in §15-18-8 of the Alabama Code. Under the Split-Sentence Act, the circuit court may impose sentences that would be illegal under other statutory sentencing schemes. The statute expressly provides that in cases where the sentence is between 15 and 20 years, the sentencing judge may reduce the time spent in confinement to a period between three and five years. Following the term of confinement, the convicted defendant will serve the remainder of the sentence on probation. Applying this rule to Elston’s sentence, the Court found the 15-year probationary period to be lawful.

The Split-Sentence Act does not, however, explicitly provide for consecutive split sentences. Nonetheless, the Court found that consecutive split sentences are not illegal under Alabama law. In the earlier case of Brand v. State, the Court of Criminal Appeals reached the same conclusion, viewing each sentence individually to determine the legality. Prior to the adoption of the Split-Sentence Act, §14-3-38(a) of the Alabama Code provided that, when a convicted defendant receives multiple sentences, those sentences shall be cumulative and served consecutively. This section, when read together with the Split-Sentence Act, supports the conclusion that consecutive split sentences are not illegal. Further, the Court found that the Split-Sentence Act had been amended multiple times since the Brand ruling, giving the legislature ample opportunity to overturn Brand’s holding. The legislative silence on the matter post-Brand implicitly suggests that the legislature accepts the Court of Criminal Appeals’ conclusion on the matter. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals.

The case of Ex parte Courtney Rayshun Elston demonstrates the connections among various statutory provisions related to sentencing, while simultaneously casting light on the relationship between the courts and the legislature. The Court’s analysis looked at the Split-Sentence Act in its full context to determine the meaning, including legislative intentions, other sentencing guidelines, and common practice in sentencing. These factors combined to support the lower court’s rulings that consecutive split sentences are not illegal under Alabama law.

If you have a a State Criminal case, a Municipal Case or a Family Law case, contact Joe Ingram or Joe Ingram Law, LLC at 205-335-2640 or 205-506-5590. Get Relief Get Results.