Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 826 SO2D 215 - Brisker v. State

Brisker v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
August 2008
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Burks v. United States · Booker v. State · Milam v. State · Ex Parte Weldon · Berry 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “` Ex parte Bailey, 590 So.2d 354, 357 (Ala.1991).... "`By this opinion we do not imply that a passenger in a stolen vehicle may never be convicted of receiving stolen property. We merely hold that, in this particular case, the State failed to present any evidence indicating that the appellant had any control over the vehicle. "Because the State has failed to prove an essential element of the charged offense, the appellant's adjudication of delinquency on the charge of receiving stolen property must be reversed and a verdict rendered in his favor. Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1 , 98 S.Ct. 2141 , 57 L.Ed.2d 1 (1978). See also L.M.A.W. v. State, 611 So.2d [497, 498 (Ala.Cr. App.1992)].”
    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.