Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 644 So. 2d 1267 - Gladden v. State

644 So. 2d 1267 - Gladden v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
2
states following
June 2010
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently June 2010

10 state decisions

50199320002010decided

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 456 So. 2d 357 - Ex Parte Clare · Strough v. State · 542 So. 2d 1312 - Harris 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"All special damages which a person shall recover against the defendant in a civil action arising out of the facts or events constituting the defendant's criminal activities; the term shall include, but not be limited to the money or other equivalent of property taken, broken, destroyed, or otherwise used or harmed and losses such as travel, medical, dental or burial expenses and wages including but not limited to wages lost as a result of court appearances."”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"[A]ll perpetrators of criminal activity or conduct [shall] be required to fully compensate all victims of such conduct or activity for any pecuniary loss, damage or injury as a direct or indirect result thereof."”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"The only issue the appellant raises on appeal is whether the trial court erred in setting the amount of restitution at $1,000,000. The state initially argues that this issue was not preserved for appeal because no objection was made at sentencing. The court, however, did not fix the amount of restitution at sentencing. At the sentencing hearing, defense counsel stated, `At this time Your Honor, we have nothing further to say, pending the assessment of restitution. It depends on what moneys are going to be assessed by the Court.' After the amount of restitution was set by the court, defense counsel raised this issue in his motion to reconsider. This is sufficient to preserve this issue for appeal. Ex parte Clare, 456 So.2d 357 (Ala.1984)."”
    1 later decision 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.