Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 710 So. 2d 537 - Mayes v. State

710 So. 2d 537 - Mayes v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
May 2004
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 641 So. 2d 1316 - Riddle v. State · Woodson v. City of Selma · Grizzard v. City of Huntsville · McLemore v. State · 594 So. 2d 1302 - Knight v. City of Enterprise

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

  1. “‘"Where the appellant, without sufficient excuse, does not appear for trial de novo when called for trial, the court may dismiss the appeal, order the bond forfeited, and remand the case to the court appealed from for enforcement of the lower court’s judgment. Upon the motion of the appellant, for good cause shown, the court may set the order of dismissal aside and reinstate the appeal on such terms as the circuit court may prescribe. Any such motion must be filed within thirty (30) days of the entry of the order of dismissal. Failure of the trial court to rule within thirty (30) days of the entry of the order of dismissal on the motion seeking reinstatement of the appeal shall constitute a denial of the motion as of the thirtieth day. The clerk of the circuit court shall send a copy of the order of dismissal of the appeal to the appropriate trial court clerk no later than thirty (30) days from the date on which the appeal is dismissed. The entry of a judgment of default on the appeal bond shall comply with the procedures set forth in § 15-13-81, [Ala.Code 1975,] and a forfeiture may be entered by the circuit court or the court from which the appeal is taken.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The plain wording of both § 12-14-70 [(e) and (g), Ala. Code 1975,] and Rule 30.5(b)[, Ala.R.Crim.P.,] supports the appellant's contention that the circuit court has authority to dismiss a de novo appeal only when the defendant fails to appear for trial.”
    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.