State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ ‘Procedural due process, as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, § 6, of the Alabama Constitution of 1901, broadly speaking, contemplates the rudimentary requirements of fair play, which include a fair and open hearing before a legally constituted court or other authority, with notice and the opportunity to present evidence and argument, representation by counsel, if desired, and information as to the claims of the opposing party, with reasonable opportunity to controvert them. See Pike v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co., 263 Ala. 59 , 81 So.2d 254 (1955); Vernon v. State, 245 Ala. 633 , 18 So.2d 388 (1944). It is generally understood that an opportunity for a hearing before a competent and impartial tribunal upon proper notice is one of the essential elements of due process.’ “Ex parte Weeks, 611 So.2d 259, 261 (Ala.1992). “In State v. Morrell, 8 So.3d 353 (Ala.Crim.App.2008), the trial court, after conducting a status conference, granted Morrell’s motion to suppress and dismissed the charges against Morrell based on the State’s failure to produce any evidence as to why the motion to suppress should not be granted. The State appealed, arguing that the trial court erred in granting Morrell’s motion to suppress because the court did not give the State notice that the motion to suppress would be considered at the status conference. 8 So.3d at 354 . The State contended that, as a result of the lack of notice, it was no”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 85 So. 3d 481 - State of Alabama v. Steven Tim Harwell.