20 Ala. App. 150 - Bell v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1924
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently November 1961
6 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 Wilson 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““As to the can and copper worm found in possession of defendant, state witness Brannon testified: “ ‘That can is what they use for stills. That rod is a part of a still, and it can be used as a part of a still. Those things can be used as a part of a still for the making or manufacturing of whisky.’ “In our opinion this evidence meets the requirements of section 2 of the act of the Legislature approved September 30, 1919 (Acts 1919, p. 1086), which establishes a rule of evidence necessary to make out a prima fade case of the offense denounced by section 1 of said act. We think the expression ‘can be used for making or manufacturing whisky’ is synonymous with and means the same as being ‘suitable to be used in the manufacture,’ etc. * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Parker v. 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.