Ala. Code § 12-11-30

Section 12-11-30 gives Alabama circuit courts jurisdiction over civil cases, including divorce proceedings.

Scott v. Judge Wilson Hayes · filed 1983-11-21

Judge Hayes, as a circuit court judge in Alabama, had jurisdiction over “all civil cases,” Ala.Code § 12-11-30 (1975), and clearly had jurisdiction over divorce cases, Ala.Code § 30-2-1.

Section 12-11-30(1) gives circuit courts original civil jurisdiction over claims exceeding $500; the increase in the district court’s small claims limit to $1,000 did not remove that jurisdiction.

CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Owens · filed 1988-07-15(1)

Even more compelling, however, is the fact that the legislature left unamended § 12-11-30(1), which establishes the circuit court’s original civil jurisdiction of matters in controversy in excess of $500.00. We are guided by the prevailing principle that repeal by implication of legislation establishing courts of general jurisdiction is not favored.

Section 12-11-30(2) gives circuit courts exclusive original jurisdiction over felony prosecutions; the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a felony occurred in Alabama.

Rothchild v. State · filed 1989-10-27(2)

The Code of Alabama states that, in criminal matters, "[t]he circuit court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction of all felony prosecutions. . . ." Ala. Code §12-11-30(2) (1975). Therefore, for a circuit court in this State to have subject matter jurisdiction, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a felony was committed in Alabama.1 Both of the crimes for which the appellant was indicted in the case sub judice were class C felonies.

Section 12-11-30(2) gives circuit courts exclusive original jurisdiction over municipal ordinance violations arising from the same incident as a felony charge.

Matthews v. City of Birmingham · filed 1991-04-26(2)

We are clear to the conclusion that the provisions of § 12-11-30(2), § 12-12-32(a), and § 12-14-1, when read together, require that the municipal ordinance violations in this cause be prosecuted directly in circuit court as both of these offenses, i.e., drinking in public and possession of drug paraphernalia, under the facts of this case, are municipal ordinance violations which arise from the same incident, on the same date, and in the same place as the felony, i.e., the possession of cocaine.

Section 12-11-30(2) does not list every matter within the circuit court's jurisdiction; an omission alone does not deprive the court of jurisdiction.

Henderson v. State · filed 1993-03-26(2)

Unless the legislature has elsewhere specifically limited the circuit court's jurisdiction of a particular matter, the mere fact that that matter is not set out in § 12-11-30 does not deprive the circuit court of jurisdiction of that matter.

Section 12-11-30(2) treats misdemeanor and ordinance violations as arising from the same incident as a felony charge when they arise from the same act.

Ex Parte City of Tuscaloosa · filed 1993-05-28(2)

We now hold that the "same incident" language of § 12-11-30(2) should be construed and interpreted to mean the "same act."

Section 12-11-30 gives circuit courts jurisdiction concurrent with district courts over legal actions with more than $1,500 but less than $5,000 in controversy, excluding costs and interest.

Kendrick v. Crocker · filed 1994-05-27(1)

The circuit courts have concurrent jurisdiction with the district courts over legal actions in which the amount in controversy exceeds $1500, but is less than $5000, exclusive of costs and interest. Ala. Code 1975, § 12-11-30. ... The Kendricks have not made a “clear showing” that the district court erred in not transferring their action back to the circuit court. The writ is denied.

Section 12-11-30 gives circuit courts jurisdiction over misdemeanors arising from the same incident as a felony charge, and dismissal of the felony charge does not remove that jurisdiction.

Casey v. State · filed 1998-10-02

A grand jury returned an indictment against Casey charging a felony DUI, thereby invoking the jurisdiction of the circuit court. The dismissal of the felony DUI against Casey before trial did not strip the circuit court of jurisdiction over the remaining misdemeanor charges. The circuit court had jurisdiction over the charges of DUI, reckless driving, and driving while his license was revoked.

Section 12-11-30(1) gives circuit courts subject-matter jurisdiction over civil actions when the amount in controversy exceeds $10,000.

Walker v. Blackwell · filed 2001-05-04(1)

The Legislature has granted circuit courts subject-matter jurisdiction over all civil actions in which the "matter in controversy exceeds" $10,000. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-11-30(1). ... The amount in dispute over the defective irrigation system is approximately $300,000. No jurisdictional defects appear on the face of the record, and Walker could fully expect to be haled into an Alabama court for his actions in Chilton County.

Section 12-11-30(3) gives circuit courts appellate jurisdiction to try district-court criminal convictions de novo, but does not authorize them to dismiss such an appeal on the State's motion and void the district-court conviction.

Hulsey v. State · filed 2003-01-31(3)

Section 12-11-30, Ala.Code 1975, provides the circuit court not only with original jurisdiction to try a criminal case, but also with appellate jurisdiction to try de novo a criminal conviction appealed from the district court. See § 12-11-30(3), Ala.Code 1975. ... We find that, in any event, the circuit court exceeded its appellate jurisdiction when it granted the State's motion to dismiss Hulsey's appeal for a trial de novo and apparently rendered Hulsey's conviction in the district court void.

Section 12-11-30(2) gives a circuit court jurisdiction when an indictment charges a felony, and the court retains jurisdiction over a misdemeanor count arising from the same incident when the felony count is dismissed.

Pruitt v. State · filed 2003-08-29(2)

When an indictment charges a felony, it invokes the jurisdiction of the circuit court. § 12-11-30(2), Ala.Code 1975; Casey v. State, 740 So.2d 1136 (Ala.Crim.App.1998). A dismissal of the felony count does not remove the circuit court's jurisdiction over a misdemeanor count when the misdemeanor count arises from the same incident as the felony count. Id. Because the misdemeanor count arose from the same incident as the felony count, the circuit court retained its jurisdiction when the State elected to proceed under the misdemeanor count.

Section 12-11-30(2) gives the circuit court jurisdiction when an indictment charges felony DUI; that jurisdiction continues even if the State fails to prove the prior convictions needed for felony sentencing.

Marshall v. State · filed 2009-02-27(2)

This indictment set forth a felony prosecution, invoking the circuit court’s jurisdiction, see Formby and § 12-11-30(2), Ala.Code 1975. Although in the sentencing phase the State failed to prove one of the three prior DUI convictions that were used to enhance the current DUI conviction to make Marshall’s conviction punishable as a felony, the circuit court has jurisdiction to sentence Marshall.

Section 12-11-30 gives circuit courts exclusive original jurisdiction over felony prosecutions; improper venue does not remove that subject-matter jurisdiction.

Ex Parte Bell · filed 2007-07-27

The Alabama Code provides that `[t]he circuit court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction of all felony prosecutions. . . .' § 12-11-30, Ala.Code 1975." 946 So.2d at 538. Bell was convicted of the offense of second-degree receiving stolen property, a Class C felony. See § 13A-8-18(b), Ala. Code 1975. Thus, the circuit court had subject-matter jurisdiction over Bell's trial.

Section 12-11-30 gives circuit courts exclusive original jurisdiction over civil actions involving more than $10,000, but the specific trust-jurisdiction statute controls proceedings concerning trust administration.

Regions Bank v. Reed · filed 2010-09-30

We acknowledge that § 12-11-30 provides for the circuit court to have exclusive original jurisdiction of civil actions in which the matter at controversy exceeds $10,000. We note, however, that this statute operates to distinguish between the jurisdiction of circuit courts and district courts as to civil actions generally.

Section 12-11-30 gives circuit courts jurisdiction over civil divorce proceedings and authority to punish contempt in related proceedings.

Tarver v. Reynolds · filed 2019-08-16(1), (5)

So understood, the Circuit Court of Elmore County — and Judge Reynolds — has subject-matter jurisdiction over the Tarvers’ divorce and the related contempt proceedings. A circuit court has broad authority to hear civil cases. Ala. Const. art. VI, § 142(b) (“The circuit court shall exercise general jurisdiction in all cases except as may otherwise be provided by law.”); Ala. Code § 12-11-30(1) (“The circuit court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction of all civil actions in which the matter in controversy exceeds ten thousand dollars . . . .”). In particular, it may divorce couples and divide their property. Ala. Code § 30-2-1(a) (“The circuit court has power to divorce persons from the bonds of matrimony . . . .”); id. § 30-2-51 (authorizing property division in divorce cases). And a circuit court may find individuals in contempt of court. Id. § 12-11-30(5) (“The circuit court may punish contempts . . . .”). Proceedings about whether Timothy must pay half of his VA disability benefits to his ex-wife under a divorce settlement agreement is a type of case that falls within the Circuit Court of Elmore County’s jurisdiction.

Section 12-11-30(2) gives Alabama circuit courts subject matter jurisdiction over felony prosecutions and related misdemeanor or ordinance violations.

White · filed 2026-03-05(2)

The second requirement is met because Alabama circuit courts have subject matter jurisdiction over criminal cases. See Ala. Code § 12-11-30(2) (“The circuit court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction of all felony prosecutions and of misdemeanor or ordinance violations which are lesser included offenses within a felony charge or which arise from the same incident as a felony charge . . . .”).

Section 12-11-30 places a circuit judge’s issuance of a writ of execution within the circuit court’s jurisdiction.

Shuler v. Swatek · filed 2012-04-10

Here, Judge Harrington’s order issuing a writ of execution against the Shulers’ house was an act taken in a judicial capacity, and Judge Harrington acted within his jurisdiction as Circuit Judge in issuing the writ of execution. See Ala. Code § 12-11-30 (jurisdiction of circuit courts); § 6-9-20 (authority to issue writ).

Section 12-11-30(4) gives circuit courts general superintendence over probate courts, but a motion to dismiss in a separate case does not invoke review of a probate order.

Franks v. Norfolk Southern Ry. Co. · filed 1996-04-26(4)

In Alabama, circuit courts have "a general superintendence" over the probate courts. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-11-30(4). Encompassed in this superintendence is the power to review certain judgments and orders of the probate court, either through direct appeal or by petition for an extraordinary writ. ... A motion to dismiss filed in the circuit court will not invoke its appellate jurisdiction over an order of the probate court.

Section 12-11-30(4) gives circuit courts general superintendence over district courts, so a district court cannot set aside a circuit court order.

Clay v. State · filed 1990-03-30(4)

"The circuit court shall exercise a general superintendence over all district courts...." Ala.Code 1975, § 12-11-30(4). A district court has no authority to set aside any order of the circuit court. Therefore, the order of the district court revoking the petitioner's $75,000 bond and setting bond at $500,000 is void.

Section 12-11-30(4) gives circuit courts general superintendence over probate courts, but does not authorize a circuit court to stay a statutory redemption proceeding within the probate court’s exclusive jurisdiction.

CMC Properties, LLC v. Emerald Falls, LLC · filed 2013-09-27(4)

In Alabama, circuit courts have only a “general superintendence” over probate courts. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-11-30(4). ... Accordingly, the circuit court in this case did not have subject-matter jurisdiction to enter an order staying the Bank’s statutory right of redemption in the probate court, and its order purporting to do so is void.

Section 12-11-30(4) allows a circuit court to direct completion of juvenile-court records when needed to determine whether an adequate record exists for appeal.

A.A. v. Jefferson Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources (In re A.A., SR.) · filed 2018-04-20(4)

We note that the circuit court has general superintendence over the juvenile court. See § 12-11-30(4), Ala. Code 1975 ("The circuit court shall exercise a general superintendence over all district courts, municipal courts, and probate courts."). Accordingly, the circuit court may take measures, if necessary, to direct the completion of the records in order to determine whether an adequate record exists in each case.

Section 12-11-30 does not authorize a circuit court to use common-law certiorari to supervise a local government outside the court's territorial limits.

Embu, Inc. v. Comm'n · filed 2018-04-20

We therefore hold that a circuit court cannot exercise supervisory jurisdiction over a local government's denial of approval for a liquor license via a petition for the common-law writ of certiorari when the local government is located in a county that is outside the territorial limits of the circuit court.

Section 12-11-30(4) gives circuit courts supervisory authority over district courts, municipal courts, and probate courts, but not over other circuit courts or judges sitting as special circuit judges.

Judge Linda F. Coats v. State of Alabama · filed 2026-02-20(4)

Thus, Judge Pate has the authority to issue a writ of mandamus to a district-court judge -- as she did to Judge Demos -- but she did not have the authority to issue a writ of mandamus to Judge Coats because Judge Coats was acting as a special circuit-court judge when she adjudicated the PFA case. Appellate courts have supervisory jurisdiction over the circuit courts, but circuit courts do not have supervisory jurisdiction over one another.

Section 12-11-30(4) gives circuit courts supervisory authority over district courts, but not over a judge acting as a special circuit-court judge.

Henshaw v. State of Alabama · filed 2026-02-20(4)

Thus, Judge Pate has the authority to issue a writ of mandamus to a district-court judge -- as she did to Judge Demos -- but she did not have the authority to issue a writ of mandamus to Judge Coats because Judge Coats was acting as a special circuit-court judge when she adjudicated the PFA case.

Section 12-11-30(3) gives the circuit court appellate jurisdiction over civil cases appealed from district court for a trial de novo; the appeal does not invoke its original jurisdiction unless the defendant files a counterclaim exceeding the district court’s jurisdictional limit.

Blue Cross and Blue Shield v. Butler · filed 1993-12-03(3)

A plaintiff appealing from a district court judgment for a trial de novo in the circuit court has invoked the circuit court's appellate jurisdiction, not its original jurisdiction, unless the defendant files a counterclaim exceeding the jurisdictional limits of the district court.

Section 12-11-30(3) gives circuit courts jurisdiction to try criminal appeals from district courts de novo, and procedural rules cannot limit that review by requiring a defendant to reserve an issue.

Ex Parte Sorsby · filed 2007-10-19(3)

Requiring a defendant in a municipal or a district court to reserve a particular issue on appeal to the circuit court limits the review by the circuit court in derogation of §§ 12-12-70, 12-12-71, 12-14-70, and 12-11-30 and conflicts with Rule 30.6, which allows the defendant to waive his right to a jury trial in order to have the circuit court address a particular issue.

Section 12-11-30(3) gives circuit courts jurisdiction over criminal appeals from district court; that jurisdiction attaches when the defendant files a notice of appeal for a trial de novo, even if the original charging instrument is absent.

Ex parte State of Alabama. · filed 2014-06-20(3)

When Simmons filed his notice of appeal for a trial de novo in the circuit court, the circuit court's jurisdiction over his appeal for a trial de novo "attached," and the fact that the case was not prosecuted using the original charging instrument from the district court did not affect the circuit court's jurisdiction.

Section 12-11-30(3) gives the circuit court appellate jurisdiction to conduct a trial de novo when the district court had jurisdiction over the action.

Safeway Insurance Co. of Alabama v. Nunnelley · filed 2015-11-06(3)

Thus, the district court in the present case had subject-matter jurisdiction over Safeway’s action, and the appeal from the district court’s judgment invoked the circuit court’s appellate jurisdiction to conduct a trial de novo.

Section 12-11-30(3) gives circuit courts subject-matter jurisdiction over appeals from municipal-court convictions, even when the municipal-court complaint is defective.

Ex parte John Sandifer PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS (In re: City of Huntsville v. Jo · filed 2025-09-26(3)

On this point, the Court of Criminal Appeals correctly determined that any defects in the municipal-court complaints did not divest the circuit court ... of its subject-matter jurisdiction because that jurisdiction is derived from § 12-11-30(3), Ala. Code 1975, which permits appeals of municipal-court convictions to circuit courts.

Section 12-11-30(3) gives circuit courts jurisdiction over appeals from municipal-court convictions even when the complaints are defective.

Ex parte Dillon Barrett PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS (In re: City of Huntsville v. D · filed 2025-09-26(3)

On this point, the Court of Criminal Appeals correctly determined that any defects in the municipal-court complaints did not divest the circuit court ... of its subject-matter jurisdiction because that jurisdiction is derived from § 12-11-30(3), Ala. Code 1975, which permits appeals of municipal-court convictions to circuit courts.

Section 12-11-30(3) gives circuit courts subject-matter jurisdiction over appeals of municipal-court convictions even when the municipal-court complaints are defective.

Ex parte Curtis Tanner PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS (In re: City of Huntsville v. Cu · filed 2025-09-26(3)

On this point, the Court of Criminal Appeals correctly determined that any defects in the municipal-court complaints did not divest the circuit court ... of its subject-matter jurisdiction because that jurisdiction is derived from § 12-11-30(3), Ala. Code 1975, which permits appeals of municipal-court convictions to circuit courts.

Section 12-11-30(3) gives circuit courts subject-matter jurisdiction over appeals of municipal-court convictions, even when the complaints are defective.

Ex parte Brodrick Fearn PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS (In re: City of Huntsville v. B · filed 2025-09-26(3)

On this point, the Court of Criminal Appeals correctly determined that any defects in the municipal-court complaints did not divest the circuit court ... of its subject-matter jurisdiction because that jurisdiction is derived from § 12-11-30(3), Ala. Code 1975, which permits appeals of municipal-court convictions to circuit courts.

Section 12-11-30(5) permits a five-day jail sentence for each separate, specifically identified act of criminal contempt.

Shonkwiler v. Kriska · filed 2000-09-29(5)

After thoroughly reviewing the record, we conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in finding the mother in contempt and giving her a 5-day sentence for each of the 6 violations, for a total of 30 days.

Section 12-11-30(5) sets a circuit court's maximum punishment for criminal contempt at a $100 fine and five days of confinement.

Ex Parte JRW · filed 1995-07-14(5)

We note that the $100 fine and the five-day sentence track the statute that provides for the maximum punishment that may be imposed by a circuit court for criminal contempt. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-11-30(5).

Section 12-11-30(5) limits a circuit court's punishment for criminal contempt to five days in jail and a $100 fine.

Ex Parte Ivey · filed 1997-06-13(5)

The maximum sentence the circuit court can impose for criminal contempt is 5 days in jail and a $100 fine. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-11-30(5).

Section 12-11-30(5) limits punishment for contempt to five days in the county jail and a $100 fine.

Batey v. State · filed 1999-12-10(5)

The most the trial court could have done, absent an indictment or a complaint, was to find Batey in contempt of court, for violating a court order, and to sentence him to jail for five days and fine him $100. See § 12-11-30(5), Ala.Code 1975.

Section 12-11-30(5) limits punishment for criminal contempt but leaves a circuit court’s power to award compensatory damages for civil contempt unaffected.

Chestang v. Chestang · filed 2000-04-28(5)

Further, the Code section cited by the nephew, § 12-11-30(5), speaks of a court's "punish[ing]" a criminal contempt by imposing fines and by imprisoning the contemnor. In this present case, the contempt order does not impose a term of imprisonment. Further, the trial court's order clearly indicates (by its reference to the testimony about the financial loss the uncle had suffered) that the money it ordered the nephew to pay was in the nature of compensatory damages rather than in the nature of a punitive fine.

Section 12-11-30(5) limits imprisonment for contempt to five days per finding of contempt, allowing separate sentences for separate violations.

Norland v. Tanner · filed 1990-05-09(5)

Ala.Code 1975, § 12-11-30(5), limits the incarceration punishment for contempt to "imprisonment not exceeding five days." ... The trial court, in this instance, found the mother in contempt twice, and clearly ordered separate sanctions for two separate findings of contempt. The history and evidence before the trial court, viewed with our limited scope of review and applicable law, reveals no abuse or excess in the imprisonment ordered by the trial court.

Section 12-11-30(5) limits a fine for contempt to $100.

Ex Parte Baugh · filed 1988-08-05(5)

It should be noted that the maximum fine that can be imposed for the punishment of contempt is $100. § 12-11-30(5), Ala.Code 1975.

Section 12-11-30(5)'s $100 limit on criminal contempt fines does not automatically make an attorney-fee reimbursement a fine.

Kaiser v. Kaiser · filed 2003-06-27(5)

The husband also argues that the trial court exceeded its authority under Ala.Code 1975, § 12-11-30(5), by imposing a fine exceeding $100 for criminal contempt. [5] The trial court's order to pay $2,500 for the wife's attorney fees incurred in connection with the criminal-contempt proceedings and related proceedings regarding spoliation of evidence, however, is not per se a fine.

Section 12-11-30(5) limits imprisonment for a single criminal contempt to five days.

Hill v. Hill · filed 1994-04-15(5)

As previously noted, if this is criminal contempt, then the trial court cannot order the contemnor imprisoned beyond a maximum of five days. Rule 33.4(a), A.R.Crim.P.; Ala.Code 1975, § 12-11-30(5).

Section 12-11-30(5) limits a circuit court’s punishment for contempt to a $100 fine and five days’ imprisonment.

In Re Allison · filed 1995-05-16(5)

The penalty which may be imposed for criminal contempt is limited by Ala.Code § 12-11-30(5) which provides that: “A circuit court may punish contempts by fines not exceeding $100.00 and by imprisonment not exceeding five days.”

Section 12-11-30(5) limits punishment for criminal contempt to a $100 fine and/or five days in jail per offense, but does not prevent a discretionary attorney-fee award when the contempt is also civil.

Kilpatrick v. Gray · filed 1997-03-07(5)

We note that the maximum punishment for criminal contempt is a $100 fine and/or five days in jail, per offense. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-11-30(5). ... This court has also held that a finding of contempt in a post-divorce proceeding can be both a finding of criminal contempt and a finding of civil contempt and that the trial court, in its discretion, may award attorney fees which exceed the statutory punishment for criminal contempt. ... Therefore, we conclude that the dispositive issue is whether the trial court’s award of attorney fees and costs amount to an abuse of discretion.

Section 12-11-30(5) provides a five-day incarceration period as a sanction for criminal contempt.

Fludd v. Gibbs · filed 2001-04-20(5)

The motion further asks that the court place the wife in jail for "a period of five (5) days"; that period of time coincides with the period provided for in § 12-11-30(5), Ala.Code 1975. Incarceration for the statutory 5-day period has been repeatedly held to be a sanction for criminal, not civil, contempt.

Section 12-11-30(5) limits criminal contempt punishment to a $100 fine and five days of imprisonment per act; time on work release counts toward the imprisonment limit.

Crowe v. State ex rel. Patterson · filed 2003-04-04(5)

Section 12-11-30(5) establishes the sanction for criminal contempt as a fine not exceeding $100 and imprisonment not exceeding 5 days. ... Second, while work release involves less confinement than ordinary imprisonment because the father can work outside the prison, he is, nevertheless, in custody, and a sentence longer than 200 days was outside the trial court’s authority.

Section 12-11-30(5) limits punishment for criminal contempt to a $100 fine and five days of imprisonment.

Mullins v. Lisa Christine Sellers. · filed 2011-09-02(5)

Conversely, a finding of criminal contempt seeks to impose a punishment for disobedience of orders of the trial court, and, in Alabama, the sanction for a finding of criminal contempt is limited to a fine of $100 and imprisonment not to exceed five days.

Section 12-11-30(5) limits punishment for criminal contempt to five days in jail and a $100 fine.

Ingram v. Allred · filed 2012-10-19(5)

Thus, between March 6, 2012, and March 21, 2012, the date the trial judge found Ingram in contempt for additional acts, the maximum sentence the trial judge could have imposed on Ingram was 5 days in jail and a $100 fine. See §§ 12-12-6 and 12-11-30(5).

Section 12-11-30(5) limits criminal contempt sanctions to a $100 fine and five days’ imprisonment.

Kent v. Herchenhan · filed 2016-07-15(5)

Based on the terminology used, the order of a definite schedule of incarceration in accordance with the limits of the criminal-contempt statute, and the institution of conditions in which probation could be revoked, we conclude that the contempt finding was in the nature of a criminal-contempt finding.

Section 12-11-30(5) limits a circuit court’s contempt fine to $100.

Byrd v. State · filed 2008-10-31(5)

We first note that the maximum fine that a circuit court may impose for a finding of contempt is $100. § 12-11-30(5), Ala.Code 1975. Thus, the $200 fine imposed against Byrd in this case was improper.

Section 12-11-30(5) limits a contempt fine to $100 per instance of contempt and does not authorize charging a contemnor for the cost of incarceration.

White v. White · filed 2013-04-12(5)

Additionally, although the husband has failed to raise an issue regarding the amount of the "fine” on appeal, we note that there is no provision empowering a court of this state to require a contemnor to pay the cost of his or her incarceration; rather, a court may punish a contemnor with a fine of no more than $100 for each instance of contempt.

Section 12-11-30(5) permits up to five days of imprisonment for each separate finding of criminal contempt.

Preston v. Saab · filed 2010-02-05(5)

Although we believe that the mother’s jail sentence was particularly harsh in light of the circumstances of this case, we cannot conclude that the trial court exceeded its discretion in sentencing the mother to five days in jail for each finding of criminal contempt. See Ala.Code 1975, § 12-11-30(5) (permitting punishment for contempt by imprisonment not to exceed 5 days).

Section 12-11-30(5) limits criminal contempt sanctions to a $100 fine and five days' imprisonment; civil contempt sanctions may exceed those limits.

J.S. v. L.M. · filed 2017-07-14(5)

Sanctions for criminal contempt are statutorily limited to a maximum fine of $100 and imprisonment not to exceed five days. § 12-11-30(5), Ala. Code 1975.

Section 12-11-30(5) limits criminal contempt sanctions to a $100 fine and five days’ imprisonment, but its limits do not apply to civil contempt sanctions.

Lester v. Amber Lester · filed 2022-12-22(5)

As mentioned above, the trial court's imposition of $2,000 in fines does not necessarily compel the conclusion that the trial court determined that the father was in criminal contempt, because a trial ... court may impose a monetary fine as a judicial sanction for civil contempt.

Section 12-11-30(5) limits sanctions for criminal contempt to a $100 fine and five days of imprisonment.

Shook v. Shook · filed 2023-04-28(5)

In addressing the father's argument, we note that sanctions for criminal contempt are limited by statute to a maximum fine of $100 and imprisonment not to exceed five days. See § 12-11-30(5), Ala. Code 1975. ... In accordance with L.S., we conclude that the trial court had no authority to impose on the ... father a probationary period for the offense of criminal contempt.

Section 12-11-30(5) limits a circuit court's criminal contempt fine to $100 per instance of contempt.

Knighton v. James Knighton (Appeal from Montgomery Circuit Court: DR-21-900558.03). · filed 2025-05-23(5)

The maximum fine that could properly have been imposed in this case was $200, or $100 per instance of contempt found; thus, to that extent only, we vacate the judgment of the trial court and remand the cause with instructions to the trial court to direct the mother to pay a fine within the limits specified in § 12-11-30(5).

Section 12-11-30(5) permits a circuit court to impose up to five days of imprisonment for each count of criminal contempt.

John Edward Bryson, Jr. v. Brenda Mae Bryson (Appeal from Madison Circuit Court: DR-16-490.02). · filed 2025-05-23(5)

Upon finding the former husband in criminal contempt, the trial court was authorized by Rule 70A(e)(1), Ala. ... R. Civ. P., and Ala. Code 1975, § 12-11-30(5), to punish the former husband with a sentence of imprisonment not exceeding five days for each count of contempt.

Section 12-11-30(5) authorizes up to five days of imprisonment for each count of criminal contempt.

John Edward Bryson, Jr. v. Bryson · filed 2025-07-25(5)

Upon finding the former husband in criminal contempt, the trial court was authorized by Rule 70A(e)(1), Ala. R. Civ. P., and Ala. Code 1975, § 12-11-30(5), to punish the former husband with a sentence of imprisonment not exceeding five days for each count of contempt.

Section 12-11-30(2) does not give the circuit court exclusive original jurisdiction over related misdemeanors when an indictment supersedes the felony complaint with a misdemeanor charge before trial.

Ex Parte Russell · filed 1994-07-01(2)

When Russell was tried in the municipal court in February 1992 for DUI and DRL, no felony charge was pending; therefore, the exclusivity provision in § 12-11-30(2) was not triggered.

Section 12-11-30(2)'s exclusive original jurisdiction over misdemeanors arising from the same incident as a felony charge does not apply when a misdemeanor indictment supersedes the felony complaint and no felony charge remains pending.

City of Tuscaloosa v. Russell · filed 1994-07-01(2)

In other words, the original charging instrument was nullified by the indictment, which was returned on November 18, 1991. When Russell was tried in the municipal court in February 1992 for DUI and DRL, no felony charge was pending; therefore, the exclusivity provision in § 12-11-30(2) was not triggered.

Section 12-11-30(2) gives the circuit court jurisdiction over misdemeanors arising from the same incident as a felony charge; dismissal of the felony does not divest that jurisdiction, and the circuit court may transfer the remaining misdemeanors to district court.

Davis v. State · filed 2001-05-25(2)

When the grand jury returns an indictment against a defendant charging him with felony DUI and with misdemeanors, the jurisdiction of the circuit court is invoked. A subsequent dismissal of the felony DUI charge does not divest the circuit court of its jurisdiction over the misdemeanor charges, i.e., if a defendant is willing, the court may accept his guilty pleas and impose an appropriate sentence. The circuit court may also dismiss the indictment, on the basis that it is fatally defective. Lastly, the circuit court may transfer the case to the district court for disposition of any remaining misdemeanor charges.

Circuit courts have original jurisdiction over a misdemeanor arising from the same incident as felony charges.

Gargis v. State · filed 2007-12-21(2)

We recognize that disorderly conduct is a misdemeanor over which, in and of itself, the circuit court would not have had jurisdiction. However, the circuit court did have original jurisdiction over the misdemeanor offense of disorderly conduct in this case because it arose from the same incident as the felony charges brought in this case. § 12-11-30(2), Ala.Code 1975.

Section 12-11-30(2) lets a circuit court retain jurisdiction over misdemeanor DUI when the State cannot prove enough prior convictions for felony DUI, because both arise from the same incident.

Marshall v. State · filed 2008-04-04(2)

We now specifically hold that a circuit court retains jurisdiction of a misdemeanor DUI offense when the State fails to prove the necessary prior DUI convictions to elevate the offense to a felony. According to § 12-11-30(2), Ala.Code 1975, the two offenses arose out of the same incident; thus, jurisdiction is proper in the circuit court.

Section 12-11-30(2) gives a circuit court jurisdiction over a misdemeanor arising from the same act as a felony charge, but a loose causal connection between the offenses is insufficient.

Woods v. State · filed 2016-12-16(2)

Applying this Court’s most recent interpretation of § 12-11-30(2), Ala. Code 1976, to this case, we conclude that, although Woods was arrested for misdemeanor DUI and second-degree promoting prison contraband on the same evening, the misdemeanor-DUI charge did not “arise from the same incident” as the second-degree-promoting-prison-contraband charge. Indeed, it would not be necessary in this case for the State to rely on or to prove any of the facts supporting the misdemeanor-DUI charge to prove any element of the second-degree-promoting-prison-contraband charge.

Section 12-11-30 gives circuit courts exclusive original jurisdiction over felony prosecutions, even when the indictment is defective.

Ex Parte Seymour · filed 2006-06-30

The Alabama Code provides that "[t]he circuit court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction of all felony prosecutions. . . ." § 12-11-30, Ala.Code 1975. The offense of shooting into an occupied dwelling is a Class B felony. § 13A-11-61(b), Ala.Code 1975. As a result, the State's prosecution of Seymour for that offense was within the circuit court's subject-matter jurisdiction, and a defect in the indictment could not divest the circuit court of its power to hear the case.

Section 12-11-30(2) gives circuit courts exclusive original jurisdiction over felony prosecutions, while allowing district courts to receive guilty pleas in noncapital felony cases.

State v. Brown (Ex parte State) · filed 2018-02-02(2)

Therefore, in noncapital felony cases, a district court has authority only to hold preliminary hearings and to receive guilty pleas and impose sentences resulting from those guilty pleas.

Section 12-11-30(2) gives circuit courts exclusive original jurisdiction over felony prosecutions, and assigning a particular judge does not change that jurisdiction.

Osborn v. State of Alabama · filed 2026-06-26(2)

Judge Howell's September 2022 order assigning the case to Judge Waters does not implicate the subject-matter jurisdiction of the circuit court.