Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 23 SO3D 77 - Ex Parte King

Ex Parte King’s Empirical Analysis

2009

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
June 2013
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 890 So. 2d 1056 - Ex Parte Key · State v. Pugh · 587 So. 2d 1012 - Parks v. State · 527 So. 2d 1349 - White v. State · Ex Parte Sullivan

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

  1. ““ ‘The Court of Criminal Appeals has authority to issue such remedial and original writs as are necessary to give it a general superintendence and control of the circuit courts in criminal matters, over which it has exclusive appellate jurisdiction.’ Ex parte Nice, 407 So.2d 874, 876 (Ala.1981). However, ‘[mjanda-mus cannot be used as a substitute for appeal, when no appeal is authorized by law or court rule .... ’ Nice, 407 So.2d at 879 (emphasis omitted). Instead, mandamus ‘is appropriate in exceptional circumstances which amount to judicial usurpation of power.’ Nice, 407 So.2d at 878 (emphasis omitted). Moreover, ‘mandamus can be used to prevent a gross disruption in the administration of criminal justice.’ Nice, 407 So.2d at 879 (emphasis omitted). Thus, when the trial court has acted without lawful authority, the State has been afforded mandamus relief. See, e.g., State v. Blane, 985 So.2d 384 (Ala.2007)(directing circuit court to vacate order expunging criminal record); D.B.Y. v. State, 910 So.2d 820 (Ala.Crim.App.2005)(directing trial court to reinstate juvenile’s probation and direct that juvenile undergo sexual-offender risk assessment before being released from probation). “King argues that the Court of Criminal Appeals, by granting the State’s petition for a writ of mandamus, ‘has granted to the State ... the ability to file what amounts to an interlocutory appeal under the guise of mandamus relief.’ King’s petition, at 4. On the other hand, the State argues that ”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““[M]andamus ‘is appropriate in exceptional circumstances which amount to judicial usurpation of power.’ [Ex parte ] Nice, 407 So.2d [874,] 878 [ (Ala.1981) ] (emphasis omitted). Moreover, ‘mandamus can be used to prevent a gross disruption in the administration of criminal justice.’ Nice, 407 So.2d at 879 .... Thus, when the trial court has acted without lawful authority, the State has been afforded mandamus relief. See, e.g., State v. Blane, 985 So.2d 384 (Ala.2007) (directing circuit court to vacate order expunging criminal record); D.B.Y. v. State, 910 So.2d 820 (Ala.Crim.App.2005) (directing trial court to reinstate juvenile’s probation and direct that juvenile undergo sexual-offender risk assessment before being released from probation).””
    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.