Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 139 ALA 16 - Parrish v. State

Parrish v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1903

Citation profile

133
cited by 133 later decisions
7
states following
March 1996
most recently cited

133 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 133 later decisions — most recently March 1996 · most notably Anderson v. State (1922), Wilson v. State (1942)

133 state decisions

3901903191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Parsons v. State · Crawford v. State · Hornsby v. State · Goodwin v. State · People v. Sutton

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

  1. ““The purpose of the statute has been said to be to separate as far as possible the two defenses of ‘not guilty’ and ‘not guilty by reason of insanity,’ and to have the proof directed to each of the two defenses, and the verdict to respond to each of such defenses. (Citations omitted)” Parrish v. State, 139 Ala. 16, 50 , 36 So. 1012 , 1023 (1903).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The question as to the competency of the witness, whether expert or not, to give an opinion as to the sanity or insanity of the party inquired of, is a question for the court, and not for the jury.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The opinions of expert witnesses as to insanity are not conclusive upon the jury; They are to be weighed like other evidence.”
    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.