472 So. 2d 1119 - Wray v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently March 2015
20 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 40 Ala. App. 551 - Sparks v. State · 395 So. 2d 1054 - Wilcox v. State · Sparks v. State · State v. Esdale · 340 So. 2d 896 - Smitherman 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"We have recently held that a grant of probation does not reduce a sentence, but rather that the original sentence which was suspended remains the same. State v. Green , 436 So.2d 803 (Ala. 1983). Since a grant of probation does not reduce a sentence, it necessarily follows that the revocation of probation does not increase a sentence. Based upon our holding in Green , [the defendant's] original sentence of five years remained the same throughout the trial court's actions regarding probation. Therefore, the court's grant and reconsideration of probation was not a resentencing of [the defendant] — his original sentence of five years' imprisonment remained unchanged. "Since [the defendant] was not resentenced, the Double Jeopardy Clause was not violated. To hold otherwise would be to drastically change the nature of probation itself. If probation, once granted by a court, could not be renounced by that court without the action amounting to a resentencing, then no court could ever reconsider and renounce its grant of probation without offending the Double Jeopardy Clause. We do not believe this to be the intent of the legislature when it empowered the courts with absolute discretion regarding probation."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“power of the courts to grant probation is a matter of grace, and lies entirely within the sound discretion of the trial court. Sparks v. State , 40 Ala. App. 551 , 119 So.2d 596 (1959), cert. denied, 270 Ala. 488 , 119 So.2d 600 (1960); Smitherman v. State , 340 So.2d 896 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 340 So.2d 900 (Ala. 1976).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Thomas v. State“the court's grant and reconsideration of probation was not a resentencing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Thomas v. State
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.