Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 294 Ala. 746 - Clemmons v. State

Clemmons v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

157
cited by 157 later decisions
1
states following
September 2012
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 147 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 157 later decisions — most recently September 2012 · most notably Raines v. State (1975), Watkins v. State (1978)

10 federal appellate · 147 state decisions

51019751980199020002010decided

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 Raines v. State · Morgan v. State · Oakwood Manor, Inc. v. Eck · 49 Ala. App. 720 - Armstrong v. State · People v. Roberts

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

  1. “"All that is required of the trial court, * * * is such investigation and examination of the defendant as is sufficient to enable the judge to make an intelligent determination of whether, in his discretion, the defendant is eligible to be treated as a youthful offender, rather than being tried, and if found guilty, sentenced in the normal criminal process." Clemmons v. State, 294 Ala. 746, 749 , 321 So.2d 238, 241 (1975).”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"(a) A person charged with a crime which was committed in his minority but was not disposed of in juvenile court and which involves moral turpitude or is subject to a sentence of commitment for one year or more shall, and, if charged with a lesser crime may, be investigated and examined by the court to determine whether he should be tried as a youthful offender, provided he consents to such examination and to trial without a jury where trial by jury would otherwise be available to him. If the defendant consents and the court so decides, no further action shall be taken on the indictment or information unless otherwise ordered by the court as provided in subsection (b) of this section. "(b) After such investigation and examination, the court, in its discretion, may direct that the defendant be arraigned as a youthful offender, and no further action shall be taken on the indictment or information; or the court may decide that the defendant shall not be arraigned as a youthful offender, whereupon the indictment or information shall be deemed filed. (Acts 1971, 3rd Ex. Sess., No. 335, p. 4622, § 1.)"”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[h]e was never apprised of the fact that he might be treated as a youthful offender under the statute.”
    5 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.