Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 361 So. 2d 666 - Evans v. State

361 So. 2d 666 - Evans v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
April 2007
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2007 · most notably Hopper v. Evans (1982), Evans III v. Bennett a-868 (1979)

1 federal appellate · 21 state decisions

1401978198019902000decided

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 Cobern v. State · 38 Ala. App. 573 - Schenher v. State · 54 Ala. App. 491 - Bowens v. State · Fuller v. State · Lee 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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"Robbery or attempts thereof when the victim is intentionally killed by the defendant;"”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “". . . We cannot agree that the indictments are insufficient or defective. Specifically, we cannot agree with the dissent that the State must allege in the indictment that the defendant was engaged *Page 931 in robbery and, while robbing, the victim was intentionally killed, but that the State cannot allege that the victim was intentionally killed while defendant was engaged in robbing him. We think either allegation sufficiently apprises the defendant of that with which he is charged. To adopt any other rationale would, we think, constitute a rather narrow construction, neither called for, nor required, in our judgment, by our statutory rules of construction."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “"The Grand Jury further charge that before the finding of this indictment, Woodrow Wilson Keller, Jr., did unlawfully, intentionally, and with malice aforethought kill Arley C. Davis by shooting him with a pistol while the said Woodrow Wilson Keller, Jr., was engaged in the commission of or in an attempt to commit a robbery of the said Arley C. Davis, to-wit: on October 15, 1977, during the nighttime, at a location known as Ma-Jik Market, Stadium Drive, Phenix City, Russell County, Alabama, the said Arley C. Davis, an unarmed attendant at said Ma-Jik Market, was shot with a pistol, in violation of Act Number 213, Section 2, Sub-section b; and Section 6, Sub-sections d and h (Act No. 213, Sections 2 (b), 6 (d) and 6 (h)) Acts of Alabama 1975 Regular Session, in that the said killing was committed while the said Woodrow Wilson Keller, Jr., was engaged or was an accomplice in the commission or (sic), or an attempt to commit robbery, and in that the said killing was especially heinous, atrocious or cruel."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.