State v. Washburn’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
August 1998
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Wardius v. Oregon · 219 So. 2d 846 - Duncan v. Pesnell · Alonzo v. State ex rel. Booth · Ex Parte Loveman, Joseph & Loeb
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As noted, the State contends the discovery provisions of ARCP are not applicable to an impeachment proceeding concerned entirely with allegations of factual transactions which constitute violations of criminal law. We do not agree. Authorities relied upon by the State do in fact denominate impeachment proceedings as penal in nature; a criminal prosecution in which defendant has certain constitutional rights; a proceeding in the nature of a criminal prosecution; and partakes of the nature of both civil and criminal actions. See Alonzo v. State ex rel. Booth , 283 Ala. 607 , 219 So.2d 858 . Since such proceedings seem to be unique hermaphroditic creatures, we must look to the structures provided by the legislature and this court to determine how we must regard impeachment with respect to procedural processes. We find no difficulty in holding that Rule 81 (a)(14), ARCP, makes applicable to these proceedings the discovery rules of ARCP. Section 189, Title 41, Code, makes clear that the cause (impeachment) shall be proceeded with in all respects as civil actions at law are conducted. Section 193 provides for witness fees as in civil cases; the statutes are otherwise *Page 801 silent regarding discovery procedures; and this court has rule making power under our constitution; Rule 81 (a)(14) supplies otherwise nonexistent procedures for the conduct of impeachment proceedings, thus it seems clear ARCP governs the conduct of this impeachment case.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The case [an information for impeachment] . . . shall be proceeded with in all respects as civil actions are conducted. . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“to the extent that the practice in such matters is not provided by statute.”
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.