Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 729 So. 2d 897 - Johnson v. State

729 So. 2d 897 - Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
March 2015
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Morrissey v. Brewer · Gagnon v. Scarpelli · Armstrong v. State · 474 So. 2d 743 - Ellard v. State · 474 So. 2d 758 - Ex Parte Ellard

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. ““The minimum due process requirements that must be met in revoking probation or parole are (1) written notice of the claimed violations of probation or parole, (2) disclosure to the probationer or parolee of the evidence against him or her, (3) an opportunity to be heard in person and to present witnesses and documentary evidence, (4) the right to confront and to cross-examine adverse witnesses, unless the hearing officer specifically finds good cause for not allowing confrontation, (5) a neutral and detached hearing body, and (6) a written statement by the factfinders as to the evidence relied on and the reasons for revoking probation and parole. Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 , 92 S.Ct. 2593 , 33 L.Ed.2d 484 (1972); Gagnon v. Scarpelli 411 U.S. 778 , 93 S.Ct. 1756 , 36 L.Ed.2d 656 (1973); Armstrong v. State, 294 Ala. 100 , 312 So.2d 620 (1975); Udoakang v. State, 678 So.2d 306 (Ala. Cr.App.1996); Grimes v. State, 579 So.2d 693 (Ala.Cr.App.1991).””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “limited in scope, and ordinarily the courts will only pass on the question of whether the administrative agency has acted within its constitutional or statutory powers, whether its order or determination is supported by substantial evidence, and whether its action is reasonable and not arbitrary.”
    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.