Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 355 So. 2d 411 - Henry v. State

355 So. 2d 411 - Henry v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
May 1995
most recently cited

20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently May 1995

20 state decisions

130197819801990decided

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 Manson v. Brathwaite · Moore v. Illinois · Jarrell v. State · 41 Ala. App. 46 - Lackey v. State · 50 Ala. App. 471 - Brown 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"In Alabama a defendant is not required to notify the state of an alibi defense. Therefore, in most cases the state has no way of knowing which witnesses would or could testify as to the whereabouts of the accused at the time of the offense in establishing an alibi defense. Indeed, generally the state would not even know of the existence of the alibi defense until such testimony came from the witness stand. Therefore, since the appellant was in a superior position to know of the existence and identity of his alibi witnesses it was not error for the state to comment upon his failure to produce other witnesses whose testimony would presumably aid the appellant or substantiate his story if the story were true. The prosecutor's comments were only a reasonable inference and deduction from the evidence, . . ."”
    3 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.