Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 223 S.C. 112 - Lovell v. State

Lovell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1953

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
7
states following
November 2014
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently November 2014 · most notably Rodriguez v. State (1991), 162 Tex. Crim. 286 - Ex Parte Fennell (1955)

2 federal appellate · 25 state decisions

601953196019701980199020002010decided

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 Escoe v. Zerbst · Zerbst v. Kidwell · Anderson v. Corall · State v. White · United States ex rel. Tomasello v. Smith

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

  1. “At any time during the period of probation the court may issue a warrant for violation of the conditions of probation and cause the defendant to be arrested. Any probation officer, police officer or other officer with power of arrest, may arrest such defendant without a warrant upon the request of the judge of said court. A probationer so arrested may be detained in the county jail or other appropriate place of detention until he can be taken before the court. Such officer shall forthwith report such arrest and detention to such court. Thereupon, the court shall cause the defendant to be brought before it and, after a hearing without a jury, may continue or revoke the probation and shall in such case proceed as if there had been no probation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “"There is nothing in our statute expressly requiring that the order of revocation be made within the probationary period. It is only provided that during this period the warrant shall be issued, which is the pertinent jurisdictional fact. * * * It is not reasonable to suppose that the General Assembly intended in every case, regardless of the circumstances, that the warrant must be executed, a hearing had and the order of revocation issued within the probationary period. Such a construction would enable one who has violated the terms of his probation to avoid the execution of his sentence by escaping from the custody of the probation officer and remaining in a foreign jurisdiction or in concealment until the period of probation has expired."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “(1) The State's motion to revoke the defendant's probation is filed within the term of probation; (2) A warrant of arrest or a capias issues by the trial court within the probationary term; (3) The State diligently attempts to prosecute the motion to revoke, including the apprehension of the defendant; (4) The alleged violation of probation occurred prior to the expiration of the probationary period; and (5) The trial court holds a revocation hearing without undue or unreasonable delay. Hardman, supra, at page 129.”
    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.