Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 267 Ala. 3 - Relf v. State

Relf v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1957

Citation profile

118
cited by 118 later decisions
2
states following
March 1977
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 114 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 118 later decisions — most recently March 1977 · most notably Bell v. Alabama (1966), 90 N.J. Super. 464 - State v. Mason (1966)

4 federal appellate · 114 state decisions

570195719601970decided

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 Campbell v. State · Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. McDaniel · Richards v. Williams · Pate v. State · 38 Ala. App. 480 - Clark 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 118 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““ * * * Where bills of exceptions have been abolished, the transcript of the record shall be filed in this court within sixty days after the transcript of the evidence has been established in the court below. The trial judge may extend the time for filing transcript of the record in this court for good cause shown for not to exceed thirty days, and this extension may be made within the thirty additional days, provided that in no event shall such extension project the time for filing the transcript beyond ninety days. * * * ””
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““Act No. 886, Acts of Alabama 1951, p. 1527, listed in the Pocket Part of the Code as Tit. 7, §§ 827(l)-827(6), as amended by Act No. 97, Acts of Alabama Special Sessions 1956, p. 143, provides that the court reporter’s transcript of the evidence must be filed with the clerk of the circuit court within sixty days from the date on which the appeal was taken; or within sixty days from the date of the court’s ruling on the motion for a new trial, whichever date is later. “ * * * Since there was no [valid] judgment on the motion [for a new trial], there was no new point of departure from which the time for filing the transcript of the evidence could begin to run. The time, therefore, must be dated back to the date on which the appeal is taken. Stallings v. Clark, 218 Ala. 31 , 117 So. 467 ; Folmar v. First Nat. Bank of Montgomery, 223 Ala. 625 , 137 So. 777 ; Central of Georgia Ry. Co. v. McDaniel, 262 Ala. 227 , 78 So.2d 290 . See Richards v. Williams, 231 Ala. 450 , 165 So. 820 ; Merritt v. Carter, 243 Ala. 272 , 9 So.2d 779 ; Pate v. State, 244 Ala. 396 , 14 So.2d 251 . “Applying the law of these cases to the facts in the instant case, it follows that the transcript of the evidence should have been filed within sixty days after October 22, 1956 [January 2, 1962], unless the time was extended by the trial court for cause. It was not filed until May 2, 1957 [April 9, 1962], more than four months [thirty days] after it was due, and there is nothing in the record showing that the ”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““§ 368. Manner of taking appeals.— Appeals in criminal cases must be taken at the time of sentence or confession of judgment, or within six months thereafter in manner following: (a) An entry of record that defendant appeals from the judgment with or without suspension of judgment, as he may elect, to be taken at the time of judgment rendered; or, (b) The filing of a written statement signed by the defendant or his attorney that the defendant appeals from the judgment, the statement to be filed within six months; provided, however, that the trial court shall retain jurisdiction of the cause for the.purpose of hearing and determining a motion for a new trial, seasonably made, and any appeal from a judgment of conviction shall also raise the question of the correctness of the court’s ruling on a motion for a new trial made within the time allowed, and in the manner prescribed by law.””
    2 later decisions 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.