Walden v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"The majority states that the prejudice alleged by Walden `was alleviated by the circuit court's instruction to the jury.' 241 So.3d at 11 . The circuit court instructed the jury `that evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is admissible to prove the defendant's intent and knowledge at the time of the alleged offense.' The instruction eliminated none of the prejudice. In Ex parte Casey , 889 So.2d 615 (Ala. 2004), the Alabama Supreme Court held that evidence of Casey's prior convictions for theft and the unauthorized use of a credit card should not have been admitted during his trial on a charge of receiving stolen property because the evidence should have been excluded under Rule 404(b). The Court further held that the evidence served only to suggest that, because Casey `had harbored the dishonest intent that constituted essential elements of his prior crimes, he must have harbored the dishonest intent that constituted essential elements of the crimes' for which he was then on trial. Id. at 621 . The Alabama Supreme Court held that the error was not harmless because, the Court said, the evidence tended only to show that he probably committed the crime for which he was being tried because he had committed a similar crime previously. `The erroneous admission of the defendant's prior convictions into evidence substantially increased the likelihood that he would be convicted on at least some of the numerous counts then being tried, as he was.' Id. at 622 . The Alabama Supreme”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 241 So. 3d 1 - Walden v. State (Ex parte Walden)

2. “"On March 8, 2011, Elba Police Officer Alva Carlson received a complaint about a `reckless driver coming down [Highway] 29 from Andalusia towards Gantt; the report indicated that the driver was a black male and that he was driving a blue vehicle with a `helping schools' tag. Officer Carlson drove in that direction and saw a vehicle matching the description parked at a house on Deer Run Road. Officer Carlson pulled up behind the vehicle and noticed Walden sitting in the front passenger seat. Walden exited the vehicle and asked Officer Carlson if there was a problem. Walden then closed the passenger door, despite Officer Carlson's demands to leave it open. After Walden closed the door, the driver of the vehicle began to drive away without Walden. Officer Carlson ordered Walden to sit down and wait while he followed and stopped the vehicle. "Officer Carlson yelled at the driver to stop several times and followed the vehicle onto a dirt road. As Officer Carlson followed the vehicle, he saw the driver throw a red cooler out the passenger side window. Officer Carlson turned on his lights and siren and noted that the `driver mashed the gas and refused to stop.' After a brief pursuit, the driver stopped the vehicle and fled the area on foot; he was subsequently apprehended with the assistance of another officer. "After arresting the driver, officers retrieved the red cooler and discovered a large bag of what was later determined to be marijuana inside. Officer Greg Jackson with the 2”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 241 So. 3d 1 - Walden v. State (Ex parte Walden)

3. “The trial court's charge in this case also allowed the jurors to consider Walden's prior conviction as evidence of the elements of knowledge and intent, both of which were necessary to prove the charges for which he was on trial. As in Ex parte Casey , the erroneous admission of Walden's prior conviction cannot be considered harmless error....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 241 So. 3d 1 - Walden v. State (Ex parte Walden)