437 So. 2d 1375 - Barker v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

27 state decisions

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

1. “"The lack of the procedural due process mandated in Wolff and approved by our Supreme Court in Williams v. Davis , *Page 1338 386 So.2d 415 (Ala. 1980), is directly related to the substantive issue raised by Barker. Barker argues that the opinion of the arresting correctional officer that the handrolled cigarettes containing a green vegetable material actually contained marijuana does not constitute substantial evidence of his guilt. As was noted in Aikens v. Lash , 514 F.2d 55 , 60 (7th Cir. 1975), `As a practical matter, we fail to see the conflict defendants note between the term "substantial evidence" and the phrase "evidence relied on and reasons for the disciplinary actions." . . . . The term "substantial evidence" need not be something prison officials should be overly concerned about. In each case, they should write their conclusions and the reasons for them based on the evidence they have heard.' "We reject Barker's argument that scientific evidence was necessary to prove that the vegetable material was marijuana. Evidence that the arresting officer was qualified from study, experience, or observation to identify marijuana would have been sufficient. Jenkins v. State , 46 Ala. App. 719 , 248 So.2d 758 (1971). In other words, why did the arresting officer `believe' the material was marijuana? Without such information the action of the board was arbitrary and capricious."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Wakefield v. State · 461 So. 2d 1335 - Williams v. State

2. “Inmate plead not guilty. Based on arresting officer's statement and evidence found, inmate was found guilty.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 439 So. 2d 822 - Barnhill v. State · 451 So. 2d 429 - Spooner v. State

3. “`evidence relied on and reasons' for the disciplinary action”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 439 So. 2d 822 - Barnhill v. State · 460 So. 2d 254 - Rice v. State