Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 758 P2D 130 - Alfred v. State

Alfred v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
8
states following
March 2026
most recently cited

13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently March 2026

13 state decisions

7019881990200020102020decided

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 51 Cal. 2d 371 - In Re Osslo · State v. Montgomery · 116 Ill. App. 3d 695 - People v. Mowery · State v. Randolph · 83 Ill. App. 3d 951 - People v. Patrick

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

  1. “fairness requires that the court adhere to the terms of its agreement, and conduct a probation revocation hearing, not a contempt hearing”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “We therefore conclude that the court may not invoke its contempt power to punish a defendant for a probation violation, at least when the defendant has not been warned of this possibility.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “contempt of court was the only sanction permissible”
    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.