Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1 ALAAPP 108 - Mosely v. State

Mosely v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1911

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
December 1960
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently December 1960

7 state decisions

30191119201930194019501960decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Nixon v. State · Johnson v. State · State v. Jones · Bryant v. State

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““While our courts have, at times, treated a motion to quash an indictment for defects apparent on the face of the indictment, or for irregularities in the formation or in the conduct of the grand jury which preferred the indictment, as the equivalent of a demurrer or plea in abatement, nevertheless it is the true rule in Alabama, as declared by McClellan, C. J., in Johnson v. State, 134 Ala. 54 , 32 South 724 , that the refusal of a trial court to quash an indictment is in the unrevisable discretion of the trial court.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.