White v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 193 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 195 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably 391 So. 2d 133 - Dolvin v. State (1980), 363 So. 2d 1020 - Thomas v. State (1978)
2 federal appellate · 193 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Johnson v. Zerbst · Escobedo v. Illinois · Smith v. State · Alabama Great Southern Railroad Co. v. Bishop
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 195 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Circumstantial evidence alone is enough to support a guilty verdict of the most heinous crime, provided the jury believes beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Smith v. State · Williams v. State“"`. . . The prosecution's opening statement to the jury on what it expects to prove should be confined to statements based on facts admissible in evidence. Higdon v. State , 25 Ala. App. 209 , 143 So. 213 (1932). Counsel, however, is to be allowed considerable latitude in presenting to the jury in his opening statement what he expects the evidence to show. Rogers v. State , 49 Ala. App. 78 , 268 So.2d 859 (1972) . . .' White v. State , 294 Ala. 265 , 314 So.2d 857 , 861-2 (1975), cert. denied, White v. Alabama , 423 U.S. 951 , 96 S.Ct. 373 , 46 L.Ed.2d 288 (1975), reh. denied, 423 U.S. 1039 , 96 S.Ct. 577 , 46 L.Ed.2d 415 (1975)."”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Ex Parte Baldwin · Powe v. State“[t]he criterion for admission of expert testimony is that the witness, by study, practice, experience, or observation as to the particular subject, should have acquired a knowledge beyond that of ordinary witnesses.”
5 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.