Little v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently February 2014
5 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 · Chapman v. State of California · Messerschmidt v. United States · Coral v. State · Hoffman v. Idaho
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"`(2) That if the child is unable to pay a lawyer and if the child's parents or guardian have not provided a lawyer, one can be provided; "`(3) That the child is not required to say anything and that anything the child says may be used against the child; "`(4) That if the child's counsel, parent, or guardian is not present, then the child has a right to communicate with them, and that, if necessary, reasonable means will be provided for the child to do so.'"”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Keller · Russell v. State“"it is not the province of this Court to make policy. Our function is to interpret the law. Art. III, § 43, Alabama Constitution of 1901, states: "`In the government of this state, except in the instances in this Constitution hereinafter expressly directed or permitted, the legislative department shall never exercise the executive and judicial powers, or either of them; the executive shall never exercise the legislative and judicial powers, or either of them; the judicial shall never exercise the legislative and executive powers, or either of them; to the end that it may be a government of laws and not of men.' "`Courts, above all others, are charged with a very sacred duty not to encroach upon the domain of other departments of government under our constitutional system of government.' Hendrix v. Creel , 292 Ala. 541 , 545 , 297 So.2d 364 (1974). As the Alabama Supreme Court stated in Piggly Wiggly No. 208, Inc. v. Dutton , 601 So.2d 907 , 911 (Ala. 1992): "`"No branch of the government is so responsible for the autonomy of the several governmental units and branches as the judiciary. Accordingly, we have held that courts cannot and will not interfere with the discretion vested in other units or branches of government."' "Quoting Finch v. State , 271 Ala. 499 , 503 , 124 So.2d 825 (1960)."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Wilson v. State“"(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any person who has attained the age of 16 years at the time of the conduct charged and who is charged with the commission of any act or conduct, which if committed by an adult would constitute any of the following, shall not be subject to the jurisdiction of juvenile court [sic] but shall be charged, arrested, and tried as an adult: "(1) A capital offense. "(2) A Class A felony. "(3) A felony which has as an element thereof the use of a deadly weapon. "(4) A felony which has as an element thereof the causing of death or serious physical injury."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Ex Parte State
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.