16 Ala. App. 77 - Newell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 state decisions

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

1. ““Improper argument of opposing counsel, when provoked by and made in reply to improper argument of counsel for plaintiff in error, does not ordinarily afford ground for reversal. As to proceedings in court, the general rule is that an attorney has full authority to act for his client, and the . latter is legally responsible therefor. Henderson and Costello v. State 94 Fla. 318 , 113 So. 689 . “ . . . Counsel should always confine their arguments to the evidence, and this should especially apply to counsel having the concluding argument in a criminal case. The state wants the guilty convicted and punished; but it is jealous ■of the liberties of its citizens, and only permits convictions to stand in cases where the facts warrant the verdict. The state wants no conviction by reason of the eloquence or adroitness of her prosecuting officers. But where counsel for a defendant has himself gone outside of the evidence and made allusions to facts that have not and could not be legally proven, and indeed, to testimony excluded on his motion, he cannot complain if, in the heat of argument, the state’s counsel replies to him in kind. ...” Newell v. State 75 So. 625 , 16 Ala. App. 77 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Rogers v. State