Hurst v. State

Decided January 23, 1975

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1975-01-23

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“this court does not wish to be understood as approving or disapproving all of the language used or the statements of law made in the opinion of this case in the Court of Criminal Appeals.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 402 So. 2d 1052 - Billingsley v. State

Relies on 54 Ala. App. 254 - Hurst v. State · 47 Ala. App. 182 - Felton v. State · Mobile Pure Milk Co. v. Coleman

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1975-01-23

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently January 2003 · most notably 335 So. 2d 663 - Johnson v. State (1976), 339 So. 2d 1035 - Lewis v. State (1976)

38 state decisions

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.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

McCALL, Justice.

¶1 Petition of Jimmy Ray Hurst for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals to review and revise judgment and decision of that court in Hurst v. State, 54 Ala.App. 254, 307 So.2d 62, decided November 12, 1974, is denied.

¶2 In denying the petition for writ of certiorari in this case, this court does not wish to be understood as approving or disapproving all of the language used or the statements of law made in the opinion of this case in the Court of Criminal Appeals. See Mobile Pure Milk Co. v. Coleman, 230 Ala. 432, 161 So. 829; Opelika Coca-Cola Bottling Co., Inc. v. Johnson, 286 Ala. 460, 241 So.2d 331; Cooper v. State, 287 Ala. 728, 252 So.2d 108, and Winn-Dixie Montgomery, Inc. v. Brindley, 289 Ala. 755, 266 So.2d 150.

¶3 Writ denied.

HEFLIN, C. J., and COLEMAN, HARWOOD, BLOODWORTH, MADDOX and FAULKNER, JJ., concur.