Rules of Criminal Procedure or the Alabama Rules of Juvenile Procedure to provide a specific procedure for relief in a situation like the present one. The Supreme Court could amend the rules so that a person who has been adjudicated delinquent in a juvenile-delinquency proceeding can institute a proceeding under Rule 32, Ala. R.Crim. P., to attack that adjudication. I believe providing this specific and well defined procedure would be preferable to using common-law writs to bring such claims. 14 . I note that Rule 32 displaced all posttrial ’ remedies, including all petitions for relief through a common-law writ, if those petitions are "seeking relief from a conviction or sen- ■ tence.” Rule 32,4, Ala. R.Crim. P,; see also Hugh Maddox, Alabama Rules of Criminal Procedure § 32,4 n. 40 (<HOLDING>), However, because W.B.S. is attacking a
holding that an appellant cannot raise an issue on appeal from the denial of a rule 32 petition which was not raised in the rule 32 petition holding that appellate courts may not on appeal from the dismissal of a rule 32 petition consider claims not raised in the rule 32 petition recognizing that rule 32 is a postconviction remedy holding that where the petitioner alleges that he failed to receive notice of the dismissal of his rule 32 ala rcrim p petition in time to effect a timely appeal therefrom and the events about which the petitioner complains all occurred before june 1 2005 the effective date of the amendment to rule 32 providing a different remedy for obtaining an outoftime appeal from the dismissal of a rule 32 petition a petition for a writ of mandamus is the only appropriate remedy holding that appellate courts may not on appeal from the dismissal of a rule 32 petition consider claims not raise in the rule 32 petition