Ex Parte Dison’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently November 2012 · most notably 501 So. 2d 1136 - City of Dothan v. Holloway (1986), 565 So. 2d 585 - Brown v. State (1990)
42 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 Slater v. State · Miles v. State · 115 So. 2d 93 - Sciortino v. State · Nash v. City of West Palm Beach · Jackson 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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“". . . [T]he circuit court did not have jurisdiction in petitioner's trial de novo because the district court judgment was void as being based upon an unverified complaint. Hence, petitioner's conviction in circuit court was itself void."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“"I do not believe the absence of a verification of the traffic ticket rendered it void. As Judge Harwood, who later served on this Court, stated in Pierce[v. State , 38 Ala.App. 97 , 77 So.2d 507 (1954), cert. denied, 262 Ala. 702 , 77 So.2d 512 (1955)]: "`The absence of a verification to a common law information does not render it void or deprive a court of jurisdiction. . . .' (Emphasis added.) "Temporary Rule 16.2(d), Ala. R.Crim. P., which provides that a question of subject matter jurisdiction can be raised at any time, does not apply. The majority quotes the substance of this rule in its opinion and states: `See Comment which explains that subject matter jurisdiction, such as a sworn complaint , cannot be waived; however, personal jurisdiction may be waived.' The Comment to Temp. Rule 16.2(d), Ala. R.Crim. P., does not make any reference to the words ` such as a sworn complaint ,' which appear in the majority opinion, so I interpret the majority's reference to be an interpretation of the words `subject matter jurisdiction.' A district court has jurisdiction to try traffic offenses such as the one involved here; therefore, I disagree with the majority's interpretation of the words `subject matter jurisdiction.' "I am mindful of our state's constitutional provision that the accused is entitled `to demand the nature and cause of the accusation; and to have a copy thereof.' Sec. 6 , Ala. Const., 1901. Here, the defendant had a statement of `the nature and cause of the accus”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“". . . [W]hen the initial affidavit in a misdemeanor case is not merely irregular, but void, it will not support the filing of a sufficient information or complaint by the district attorney for a trial de novo in circuit court.”
2 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.