Pruitt v. Peyton’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““[T]he clear purpose and intent of the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court Law cannot be achieved if it is not mandatory that the proceedings set forth in §§ 16.1-164, 16.1-166, 16.1-167, 16.1-172, 16.1-173 and 16.1-116(a) [the former transfer statute] be complied with. Indeed, the very language of the statutes makes it mandatory that the aforesaid mentioned statutes be followed before criminal jurisdiction in a proper court of record comes into being. “Here the convictions in the circuit court resulted from the judge of the juvenile and domestic relations court taking the petitioner from boyhood to manhood by ‘certifying’ him for grand jury action and trial as an adult without proper hearing. The circuit court derived its purported jurisdiction through the action taken in the juvenile court. The action of the juvenile court judge in dealing with the petitioner in his absence without a hearing and without notice to his parents, and the failure of the court to appoint a guardian ad litem to represent petitioner’s interest, violated the mandatory provisions of the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court Law and the requirements of due process, and was a denial of petitioner’s constitutional guarantee under § 8 [now art. I, § 8] of the Constitution of Virginia. [Citations omitted], “We are of opinion that a preliminary hearing in the juvenile court was jurisdictional and not procedural, and that before the circuit court could. acquire jurisdiction to try petitioner there must ha”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Turner v. Commonwealth

2. ““The petitioner has, of course, long since the termination of the original proceedings below, attained his majority and so cannot be retried as a juvenile. He should, therefore, be tried on new indictments if the Commonwealth proceeds further against him. Teyton v. French, supra, 207 Va. at 80, 147 S.E.2d at 743-744.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Pruitt v. Guerry