Rolls v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1950
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently October 1986
12 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 Birmingham Amusement Co. v. Norris · Wear v. Wear · Kozlowski v. State · Brown v. State · 33 Ala. App. 171 - McKee 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If the witness is shown to have such knowledge, he may give his opinion thereon without detailing to the jury all that he has observed.” (Citations omitted.) “The value of the opinion may of course be tested on cross-examination by eliciting the facts and appearances upon which it is based. As stated by Prof. Wigmore: “ ‘There is no principle and no orthodox practice which requires a witness having personal observation to state in advance his observed data before he states his inferences from them; all that needs to appear in advance is that he had an opportunity to observe and did observe.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It is a mistake to suppose that expressions in judicial opinions, properly there used, can be made to serve as clear, succinct statements of the law in special charges to the jury.”
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.