Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 279 Ala. 371 - Edwards v. State

Edwards v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1966

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
1
states following
August 1986
most recently cited

40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently August 1986 · most notably Edwards v. State (1971), 404 So. 2d 89 - Carpenter v. State (1980)

40 state decisions

260196619701980decided

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 Williams v. State · 42 Ala. App. 314 - Douglas v. State · Lockett v. State · 18 Ala. App. 578 - Leverett v. State · Clark 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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““In the instant case, the second- and third statements attributed to Coon were made in furtherance of the common de sign. The statements were made by Co.on, when defendant was not present, several days after the crime had been accomplished and after all four of the participants in the crime had been taken into custody. Because Coon did not make the statements until after the completion and termination of the common enterprise, the statements were not admissible against the instant defendant under the rule which allows the statement of one confederate to be shown in evidence against another confederate who was not present when the statement was made.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““ * * * statements of * * coconspirator made after the termination of the conspiracy are not admissible, unless so clearly related to the commission of the offense as to be a part of the res gestae or unless made in the presence of the defendant and undenied by him, in which latter case they become admissible under the rule of tacit admissions. * * * »”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “. . . [B]y the act of conspiring together the parties doing so have generally assumed as a body the attribute of individuality as relates to the prosecution of the common design or purpose, and that what is done or said by anyone in furtherance of that design is a part of the res gestae, and therefore the act of all. . . .’””
    2 later decisions 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.