Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 266 ALA 24 - Gilliland v. State

Gilliland v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1957

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
September 1991
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently September 1991

9 state decisions

5019571960197019801990decided

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 Roan v. State · Oliver v. State · Rollings v. State · Boyette v. State · 22 Ala. App. 176 - Hyche 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “". . . The jury is not permitted to consider extraneous matters, but only that which is introduced into evidence pending trial. Humber v. State , 19 Ala. App. 451 , 99 So. 68 , certiorari denied 210 Ala. 559 , 99 So. 73 ; 39 Am.Jur., § 84, p. 97; 23 C.J.S., Criminal Law, § 1369, p. 1038; 67 A.L.R. at page 1531. "In reviewing the ruling of the trial court on a motion for a new trial when extraneous matter apart from the trial is brought before the jury, the test is, whether, in our opinion, such matter might have influenced the jury in reaching their verdict, . . ."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “'It is established that in their deliberation the jury should be separated from and uninfluenced by the outside world. Any misconduct that might influence the jury, affect the verdict rendered or the punishment fixed, is a cause for a new trial. The test of vitiating influence upon a jury authorizing a new trial is not whether it did influence the jury to act without the evidence, but whether it might have unlawfully influenced the jury in the verdict returned, as to its nature, character, or degree, or the amount and extent of the punishment fixed by the jury within the statute.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “We entertain the view that the misconduct of the jury was error prejudicial to the defendant.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.