Logan v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently May 2009 · most notably 368 So. 2d 554 - Sprinkle v. State (1978), 53 Ala. App. 66 - Allen v. State (1974)
2 federal appellate · 46 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 McNabb v. United States · Townsend v. Burke · Bridges v. State · Doss v. State · Miller 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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“". . . [W]hen part of a conversation or transaction is put in evidence, the opposite party may rightfully call for the whole of it, although the evidence was in the first place illegal. Gibson v. State , 91 Ala. 64 , 9 So. 171 . Further, it has been held that when the defendant, on cross-examination of a witness elicits part of a conversation, the State may in rebuttal show the entire conversation. Davis v. Stone , 131 Ala. 10 , 31 So. 569 ; Flournoy v. State , 34 Ala. App. 23 , 37 So.2d 218 ."”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage““In Loyd v. State, 279 Ala. 447 , 186 So.2d 731 , this court said: ‘We are not advised of any case holding that a confession is inadmissible for the reason that it was made while a defendant was being held after being unlawfully arrested. As we note hereafter, the Supreme Court of the United States has held that evidence obtained as the result of an illegal search is not admissible, but we are not advised that the rule of exclusion has been applied to a confession, which is shown to have been voluntarily made, although the confessing person may have been illegally arrested. We are of opinion that the confession was not inadmissible on the ground that it was made after defendant had been taken into custody by an unlawful arrest.’ “Other recent cases holding the same are Bridges v. State, 284 Ala. 412 , 225 So.2d 821 [6]; Braggs v. State, 283 Ala. 570 , 219 So.2d 396 [3]; Hutto v. State, 278 Ala. 416 , 178 So.2d 810 [6]; Goldin v. State, 271 Ala. 678 , 127 So.2d 375 [8]; Ingram v. State, 252 Ala. 497 , 42 So.2d 36 [11]; Vander Wielen v. State, 47 Ala.App. 108 , 251 So.2d 240 [5]; Reed v. State, 48 Ala.App. 120 , 262 So.2d 321 [2]....””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““ . . . There is no evidence or inference therefrom that any officer was present or heard the confession or that cellmate Parker was a ‘plant’ or undercover agent of any officer. So there was no ‘poisonous tree’ and no ‘fruit’ of any illegal search or seizure or custodial interrogation.””
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.