424 So. 2d 1381 - Ash v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently April 2014 · most notably Ex Parte Whisenant (1985), O.M. v. State (1991)
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.
Relationships
Relies on Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · United States v. Watson · Castor v. United States · Armstrong v. State · Johnson 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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"An extrajudicial statement which would be constitutionally inadmissible in a criminal proceeding shall not be received in evidence over objection."”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“"(a) The prosecutor may, before a hearing on the petition on its merits and following consultation with probation services, file a motion requesting the court to transfer the child for criminal prosecution, if: "(1) The child was 14 or more years of age at the time of the conduct charged *Page 816 and is alleged to have committed an act which would constitute a felony if committed by an adult; or "(2) The child is 14 or more years of age and is already under commitment to an agency, department or institution as a delinquent. "(b) The court shall conduct a hearing on all such motions for the purpose of determining whether it is in the best interest of the child or the public to grant the motion. If the court so finds and there are no reasonable grounds to believe he is committable to an institution or agency for the mentally retarded or mentally ill, it shall order the case transferred for criminal prosecution. "(c) When there are grounds to believe that the child is committable to an institution or agency for the mentally retarded or mentally ill, the court shall proceed as provided in section 12-15-70. "(d) Evidence of the following and other relevant factors shall be considered in determining whether the motion shall be granted;”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. DMM v. State · D.M.M. v. State“"`[I]n Alabama, there is no requirement that the juvenile's parents be notified before or be present when the juvenile waives his constitutional rights. Likewise, there is no statute mandating the presence of a parent, guardian, legal custodian or attorney of a child during interrogation.' Ash v. State, 424 So.2d 1381 , 1386 (Ala.Cr.App. 1982). Therefore, unless the appellant requested to speak with his mother, which — viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State — he did not do, he had no right to her aid."”
3 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.