Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 32 Ala. App. 365 - Pate v. State

32 Ala. App. 365 - Pate v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1946

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
1
states following
July 2009
most recently cited

45 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently July 2009 · most notably McClary v. State (1973), Cosby v. State (1959)

45 state decisions

1601946195019601970198019902000decided

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 Blue v. State · Russo v. State · Harbin v. State · 30 Ala. App. 89 - Emerson v. State · Lowe 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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"`In order for this court to intelligently pass upon the question, enough of the remarks of the solicitor must be incorporated in the record to inform the court as to what was really said, and not mere[ly] disjointed sentences of the solicitor's speech.' Gray v. State , 19 Ala. App. 550 , 98 So. 818 , 819 ; Pate v. State , 32 Ala. App. 365 , 26 So.2d 214 ."”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"Also, our courts have pronounced the rule to be: `* * * when the facts, although undisputed are such that reasonable men may reasonably and conscientiously arrive at opposite conclusions from them, such facts present, not a question of law for the court, but a question of fact for the determination of the jury.' Stearnes v. State , 4 Ala. App. 154 , 58 So. 124 ." Pate v. State , 32 Ala. App. 365 , 26 So.2d 214 , 215 (1946).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““Our courts recognize two kinds or conditions of possession as applied to the violation of the prohibition laws. (1) Actual or manucaptional possession. (2) Constructive or possession by physical dominion or control.” Pate v. State, 32 Ala.App. 365 , 26 So.2d 214, 215 .”
    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.