of Hueytown, 920 So.2d 1075, 1077-78 (Ala.2005). Discussion Our caselaw is clear that sheriffs and their deputies enjoy State immunity under § 14 of the Alabama Constitution of 1901. “ ‘Generally, sheriffs enjoy State immunity under § 14 from actions against them in their individual capacities for acts they performed in the line and scope of their employment. [Ex parte] Davis, 930 So.2d [497,] 500-01 [(Ala.2005)] (noting in an action against a deputy sheriff that “a claim for monetary damages made against a constitutional officer in the officer’s individual capacity is barred by State immunity whenever the acts that are the basis of the alleged liability were performed within the course and scope of the officer’s employment”); see also [Ex parte] Hale, 6 So.3d [452,] 457 [(Ala.2008)] (<HOLDING>). This immunity is not unlimited and, in
holding that suit against county sheriff in his official capacity was suit against county holding that acts by a sheriff which gave rise to the plaintiffs claim against him were taken in the execution of his duties as sheriff and thus the sheriff was immune under  14 from an action seeking damages against him in his individual capacity holding that under north carolina law a sheriff is an agent of the office of the sheriff and an officialcapacity suit against him is a suit against that office holding that the sheriff when investigating crimes acts as a county officer holding a suit against a sheriff in his individual capacity was subject to section 1146llls notice requirements because the sheriff was acting in his official capacity