Byrd v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

76 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 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “" 'The rule of self-defense is that persons may and must act on the reasonable appearance of things. While it is not required that where a person is menaced he must wait until a weapon is presented ready for deadly execution, yet the danger must be real or so manifestly apparent as to create a reasonable belief of presently impending peril to life or limb. In determining this question evidence most favorable to the defendant should be considered and if there is the slightest evidence tending to prove a hostile demonstration which can be reasonably interpreted as placing the accused, at the time of the killing, in apparent imminent danger to life or other grievous bodily harm then the matter of self-defense becomes a question of fact for the jury.'”

   9 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Williams v. State · King v. State

2. “"`Facts or declarations to be admissible under the principle of res gestae must be substantially contemporaneous with the main fact under consideration and so closely connected with it as to illustrate its character, Dudley v. State , 185 Ala. 27 , 64 So. 309 [(1914)]; Jackson v. State , 177 Ala. 12 , 59 So. 171 [(1912)]; Moss v. State , 190 Ala. 14 , 67 So. 431 [(1914)]. It is true, however, that where there is an unbroken chain of events beginning with a prior difficulty and leading up to the killing, the chain of events leading up to the killing need not be a part of the res gestae in the sense that these events became a part of the crime itself, but they are admissible since they lead up to and tend to explain the acts, animus or intent of the defendant at the time he committed the killing. Keith v. State , 253 Ala. 670 , 46 So.2d 705 [(1950)]; Smith v. State , 253 Ala. 220 , 43 So.2d 821 [(1950)]; Collins v. State , 138 Ala. 57 , 34 So. 993 , 994 [(1903)].' Byrd v. State , 257 Ala. 100 , 103 , 57 So.2d 388 , 390-91 (1952)."”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 849 So. 2d 223 - Baird v. State · 472 So. 2d 1130 - Twilley v. State

3. ““ * * * In Sanders v. State, 242 Ala. 532 , 7 So.2d 483 , it was pointed out that there is a difference with reference to proof of prior difficulties where the state seeks to introduce such evidence and a situation where the defendant seeks to introduce such evidence. When such evidence is offered by the state showing the conduct of the defendant on the former occasion, it is to illustrate his acts at the time of the fatal difficulty but when it is offered by the defendant it must be subsequent to evidence tending to show self-defense. Such evidence when offered by the defendant is not admissible if he was the aggressor in the difficulty which then and there resulted in the killing. * * * ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 42 Ala. App. 638 - Plemmons v. State