Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 291 Ala. 34 - Allred v. State

Allred v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
1
states following
May 1994
most recently cited

54 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently May 1994 · most notably 401 So. 2d 191 - Nobis v. State (1981), 335 So. 2d 663 - Johnson v. State (1976)

54 state decisions

280197319801990decided

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 Anderson v. State · Blue v. State · Arant v. State · Boyle v. State · Kabase 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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"In answering the question before us, we cannot analyze each statement separately to see whether, if standing alone, if would create an ineradicable bias or prejudice; but rather they must be considered together to determine whether or not, in their cumulative effect, they created a prejudicial atmosphere incapable of eradicability. Blue v. State, 246 Ala. 73 , 19 So.2d 11 ; Kabase v. State, 244 Ala. 182 , 12 So.2d 766 . "It is a general rule that where prejudicial statements are made in the heat of argument, even though improper, in accommodation of our adversary system, such statements are considered capable of being eradicated by the trial judge in sustaining objections thereto or by appropriate instructions to the jury or both. Dunn v. State, supra. See also Arant v. State, 232 Ala. 275 , 167 So. 540 . But our cases also recognize that an exception to this rule exists were, irrespective of the best efforts of the trial judge to disabuse the mind of the jury of any prejudicial impression, the conviction obtained is not in an impartial atmosphere. Blue v. State, supra. See also Pointer v. State, 24 Ala.App. 23 , 129 So. 787 ; DuBose v. State, 148 Ala. 560 , 42 So. 862 ."”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “back out to walk the streets of this county and any other county that she wants to go into and kill whoever else she wants to.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “`And what did they do up at Bryce Institute? Of course, she went up to Bryce and they certified that in their opinion, or opinions, that she was insane. But what did they do with her? They kept her there from February until August and then put her back down here on us.'”
    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.