Hall v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

cited by 27 later decisions

states following

September 2003

most recently cited

27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently September 2003 · most notably Commonwealth v. Bavusa (2003), 414 So. 2d 998 - Dickerson v. State (1982)

27 state decisions

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 People v. . Devinny · Clark v. State · 29 Ala. App. 362 - Dorgan v. State · Britton v. State · People v. Devinny

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

“... The general rule as to exceptions, provisos, and the like, is that where the exception or proviso forms a portion of the description of the offense, so that the ingredients thereof cannot be accurately and definitely stated if the exception is omitted, then it is necessary to negative the exception or proviso. But where the exception is separable from the description, and is not an ingredient thereof, it need not be noticed in the accusation; for it is a matter of defense.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Johnson v. State · Pugh v. State
““The grand jury of said county charge that, before the finding of this indictment, EMMA LOU JOHNSON, whose name is otherwise unknown to the Grand Jury, on to-wit February 21, 1970, while at or near to-wit: 2418 23rd Street North, Birmingham, Alabama, unlawfully sell, deliver or otherwise dispose of 70 milligrams of amphetamine and 140 milligrams of secobarbital docium, a depressant or stimulant drug, to John Fisher, Jr., contrary to the provisions of Act Number 252 of 1967 Regular Session of the Alabama Legislature, otherwise known as the Alabama Drug Abuse Control Act, and that such sale, delivery or disposal took place subsequent to August 24, 1967, against the peace and dignity of the State of Alabama.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. Johnson v. State
““Both proviso (1) and proviso (2) of Sec. 5(b), (c), set out above, are separate clauses containing a subject and a predicate. These clauses are separate and distinct from that part of Sec. 5(b), (c) creating, describing, and defining the general offense, i. e., the possession of depressant or stimulant drugs. “This being so, the exceptions or provisos constitute defensive matter not to be anticipated and charged in an indictment.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Johnson v. State

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.