562 So. 2d 1386 - Hill v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
August 2000
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 531 So. 2d 940 - Ex Parte Hayden · Williams 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“While we sympathize with the motives of the trial judge, we cannot allow the modified sentences to stand. Under the circumstances presented here, the trial court had no jurisdiction to modify the original sentences. The trial judge lost all jurisdiction to modify the original sentences 30 days after sentencing. Where there is no motion for a new trial or request to modify a sentence filed within 30 days of sentencing, a trial court loses all jurisdiction to modify the sentence. Ex parte Hayden , 531 So.2d 940 (Ala. 1988); A.R.Crim.P.Temp. 13.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Touart
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.