Lewis v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

30 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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “'[W]hile, under the facts of a particular case, no single error among multiple errors may be sufficiently prejudicial to require reversal under Rule 45, [Ala. R.App. P.,] if the accumulated errors have”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Brown v. State · Demetrius Avery Jackson, Jr. v. State of Alabama.

2. “6. Disparate treatment of members of the jury venire with the same characteristics, or who answer a question in the same or similar manner; e.g., in Slappy , a black elementary school teacher was struck as being potentially too liberal because of his job, but a white elementary school teacher was not challenged. Slappy , 503 So.2d at 352 and 355.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Townes v. State · White v. State

3. ““[The appellant] also contends that our death-penalty scheme violates the Equal Protection Clause because, he says, it is arbitrary and disparate in that it fails to set forth uniform standards as to the weight a trial court must give a jury’s sentencing recommendation. As 'authority for this proposition, Lewis cites the decision in Bush v. Gore [, 531 U.S. 98 , 121 S.Ct. 525 , 148 L.Ed.2d 388 (2000) ]. We fail to see how this decision lends support for Lewis’s claim, given that the Supreme Court took care to state that its decision was ‘limited to the present circumstances,’ noting that ‘the problem of equal protection in election processes generally present many complexities.’ 531 U.S. at 109 , 121 S.Ct. [at 532], Moreover, in Harris v. Alabama, 513 U.S. 504, 511-15 , 115 S.Ct. 1031 , 130 L.Ed.2d 1004 (1995), the United States Supreme Court rejected a claim that Alabama’s death penalty statute was unconstitutional because it did not specify what weight the trial court must afford a jury’s recommendation. Alabama courts have rejected similar claims that trial judges deprive defendants of equal protection under the law by employing different processes in determining what weight to give a jury’s recommendation as to sentencing. See, e.g., Smith v. State, 756 So.2d 892, 920 (Ala.Crim.App.1997), aff'd, 756 So.2d 957 (Ala.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 830 , 121 S.Ct. 82 , 148 L.Ed.2d 44 (2000). Thus, no basis for reversal exists as to these claims.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. White v. State · Benjamin v. State