Windows Se7en Titan 64bit Edition Intégrale. Coupez en quatre si vous êtes sur Windows 7 et 8/8.1/10.. et audio, la version est à 64 bits.
696 So.2d 1153 (1997)
Ex parte Diane G. MIMMS.
(Re Diane G. MIMMS v. STATE of Alabama).
Supreme Court of Alabama.
June 27, 1997.
J. Greg Allen, Montgomery, for Petitioner.
Bill Pryor, atty. gen., and Yvonne A.H. Saxon, asst. atty. gen., for Respondent.
The petitioner, Diane G. Mimms, was convicted in the Montgomery Circuit Court of unlawful distribution of a controlled substance. She was sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the judgment. Mimms v. State, 696 So.2d 1153 (Ala.Crim.App.1995). This Court granted the petitioner's application for permission to appeal.
The facts are set out in the Court of Criminal Appeals' opinion and need not be repeated here. Mimms claims that the trial court erred in denying her motion for a mistrial after the prosecutor asked her whether she had taken prescription medication on the day she was arrested. In the motion for a mistrial, the petitioner made the following allegations:
"I am filing this Motion for a Mistrial at this time because the State has asked *1154 the following question, `Did you take any medication, the day you were arrested, or the day that you were charged?' I know that [defense counsel] objected to this line of questioning but he did not state that this line of questioning would continue if the objection was sustained.
"I am also filing this Motion for a Mistrial because the State asked the question, `Why were you taking these drugs, Diane?
"I am also filing this Motion for a Mistrial because the State asked the question, `Were you taking them to do something?'
"I am also filing this Motion for a Mistrial because the State asked the question, `Were you taking them because you could not perform your job as a teacher?'
"I am also filing this Motion for a Mistrial because the State asked the question, `Was there anything that was wrong with you, Diane?'