Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 33 Ala. App. 623 - Harris v. State

33 Ala. App. 623 - Harris v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1948

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
April 1990
most recently cited

16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently April 1990

16 state decisions

60194819501960197019801990decided

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 Arant v. State · 20 Ala. App. 615 - Parsons v. State · Bestor v. State · Kilpatrick v. State · 33 Ala. App. 291 - Everage 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““ * * * it was necessary to object to-) the comment by counsel or to move tt>exclude it, and then it was the duty of' the judge not only to sustain said motion or objection, but also to exercise a_ reasonable degree of effort to eradicate its effect from the mind of the jury; and if this Court was of the opinion on ■appeal that the comment of counsel was of such nature as that it was eradicable, and if the court did use reasonable effort which seemed to be sufficient to eradicate its effect upon the jury, the judgment of conviction should not be reversed or a motion for a new trial granted on that account. * * * “It is our opinion that such statements not having direct reference to the failure of the defendant to testify should be interpreted in the light of what has transpired in the case, the nature of the evidence against the defendant, the burden of proof fixed by law, and any other circumstances which may have occurred during the trial having a tendency to show that the solicitor was directing his remarks to the failure of the defendant to testify rather than to a failure to submit the testimony of other witnesses, which may have been peculiarly subject to his call and known to defendant to be available to him.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “In our opinion no error can be attached to the lower court's ruling in this premise because of the general and nonspecific character of the grounds assigned in support of the motion.”
    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.