47 Ala. App. 178 - Cooper v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

32 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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Several federal constitutional rights are involved in a waiver that takes place when a plea of guilty is entered in a state criminal trial. First, is the privilege against compulsory self-incrimination guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment and applicable to the States by reason of the Fourteenth. Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1 , 84 S.Ct. 1489 , 12 L.Ed.2d 653 . Second, is the right to trial by jury. Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 , 88 S.Ct. 1444 , 20 L.Ed.2d 491 . Third, is the right to confront one’s accusers. Pointer v. Texas, 380 U.S. 400 , 85 S.Ct. 1065 , 13 L.Ed.2d 923 . We cannot presume a waiver of these three important federal rights from a silent record. “What is at stake for an accused facing death or imprisonment demands the utmost solicitude of which courts are capable in canvassing the matter with the accused to make sure he has a full understanding of what the plea connotes and of its consequence. When the judge discharges that function, he leaves a record adequate for any review that may be later sought (Garner v. Louisiana, 368 U.S. 157, 173 , 82 S.Ct. 248, 256 , 7 L.Ed.2d 207 ; Specht v. Patterson, 386 U.S. 605, 610 , 87 S.Ct. 1209, 1212 , 18 L.Ed.2d 326 ), and forestalls the spin-off of collateral proceedings that seek to probe murky memories. “The three dissenting justices in the Alabama Supreme Court stated the law accurately when they concluded that there was reversible error ‘because the record does not disclose that the defendant voluntarily and understand”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Twyman v. State

2. “"This appellant was not informed and it is not shown that he understood the three constitutional rights waived by his plea of guilty, and that he understood he waived those rights by such a plea. Such waiver is part of the consequences of a plea of guilty along with whatever punishment may be imposed. In other words, the punishment imposed within the limits allowed by law is not the only consequence of such a plea. A further consequence of the plea, under the proceedings in the instant case, was whether the sentence was to run consecutively or concurrently with another sentence."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 411 So. 2d 824 - Sheehan v. State

3. ““The federal standards established by Boykin, supra, demand, ‘the utmost solicitude of which courts are capable in canvassing the matter with the accused to make sure he had a full understanding of what the plea connotes and of its consequences.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Clark v. State