369 So. 2d 563 - Clevenger v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently August 2007
11 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 Moon v. Nolen · 40 Ala. App. 106 - Haynes v. State · Haynes v. State · H. Curjel & Co. v. Hallett Mfg. Co. · Kelly 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"A question to a witness which asks whether another witness has testified falsely is improper because it calls for a conclusion of the witness and invades the province of the jury to determine the veracity of witnesses' testimony. H. Curjel & Co. v. Hallet[t] Mfg. Co., 198 Ala. 609 , 73 So. 938 (1916). See also Elliot[t] v. State, 48 Ala.App. 515 , 266 So.2d 318 , cert. denied, 289 Ala. 742 , 266 So.2d 321 (1972); Haynes v. State, 40 Ala.App. 106 , 109 So.2d 738 (1958), cert. denied, 268 Ala. 546 , 109 So.2d 746 (1959). Thus, the trial court was in error in failing to sustain objections to the above noted questions propounded by the prosecution. However, as set forth below, the error was harmless. "A judgment may not be reversed on the ground of improper admission of evidence unless, after examination of the entire cause, it is determined that the error has probably injuriously affected substantial rights of the parties. See, e.g., ARCP, Rule 61; ARAP, Rule 45; Slay v. McKean Paint & Hardware Store, Inc., 55 Ala.App. 487 , 317 So.2d 326 (1975). In Slay , we held that where there is ample evidence to support the verdict, without consideration of the improper evidence, the error will not compel reversal. "In the instant case, the jury had before it ample evidence to support its conclusion that the defendant was the father of the illegitimate child, notwithstanding the improper admission of defendant's testimony."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The only portion of the record which purports to disclose any error is the husband's motion itself; but that motion contains no more than unsupported allegations, we find no error by the trial judge in denying the motion. AFFIRMED. WRIGHT, P.J., and BRADLEY, J., concur. 1 We note, however, that the husband's rule 60 (b) motion states that both the husband and his attorney”
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.