Bradford v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 16 state decisions

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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““. . . [T]he principal point relied upon to effect a reversal of the judgment of conviction is the insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict of the jury and to sustain the judgment of conviction. “As above stated the evidence in the case was for the jury to consider and determine, and to sustain the contention insisted upon by the defendant and put the court in error, would necessitate in effect substituting ourselves for the trial court and the jury, and this we are without authority to do. The trial court and the jury saw and heard the witnesses and were in every way better able to decide this controlling question than this court could possibly be.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 50 Ala. App. 161 - Hines v. State

2. ““ * * * Thus, the evidence was in conflict, and where this is true the appellate courts of this State have universally held that a jury .question is presented, that is to say, unless the evidence palpably fails to make out a prima facie case, or if its tendencies support the charge made, or affords inferences, to be drawn by the jury in support of the charge, determination of its weight is for the jury.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 47 Ala. App. 132 - Morris v. State