564 So. 2d 891 - Ex Parte Jackson’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently April 2015
9 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Ex Parte Whisenant · Ex Parte Marek · White 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]f his counsel, parent, or guardian is not present, that he has a right to communicate with them, and that, if necessary, reasonable means will be provided for him to do so.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“". . . The Court held [in Ex parte Whisenant , 466 So.2d 1006 (Ala. 1985)]: 'If any one or more [of the Rule 11(A)] warnings are omitted, the use in evidence of any statement given by the child is constitutionally proscribed.' 466 So.2d at 1007 . "Jackson argues that under Whisenant his motion to suppress is due to be granted, because [Officer] Fowler did not inform him of his rights pursuant to Rule 11(A)(4), as Whisenant requires. Jackson argues that he should have been informed of his right to consult with his parents even though he might later be tried as an adult, and that his confession should have been suppressed. The State argues that the trial court's determination that Jackson was to be tried as an adult cures the error committed by Fowler in failing to inform Jackson of his constitutional rights as a juvenile. "We agree with Jackson that the alleged confessions are due to be suppressed. . . . Accordingly, the trial court's determination that Jackson was to be tried as an adult did not cure the error made by Fowler in failing to advise Jackson of his constitutional rights as a juvenile."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“. . . The Court held [in Ex parte Whisenant , 466 So.2d 1006 (Ala. 1985)]: 'If any one or more [of the Rule 11(A)] warnings are omitted, the use in evidence of any statement given by the child is constitutionally proscribed.' 466 So.2d at 1007 .”
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.