Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 376 So. 2d 205 - Richardson v. State

376 So. 2d 205 - Richardson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 37 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2018 · most notably Baldwin v. Alabama (1985), 500 So. 2d 1161 - Cochran v. State (1984)

1 federal appellate · 37 state decisions

27019781980199020002010decided

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 Aguilar v. Texas · Chambers v. Maroney · Lockett v. Ohio · Cady v. Dombrowski · United States v. Harris

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

  1. “"(1) An intentional misstatement by an affiant-agent, whether material or immaterial to showing probable cause; or (2) a negligent or unreasonable assertion in an affidavit, if material to showing probable cause but not where (3) the mistake is innocent, even if material to probable cause."”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"The sentencing hearing is one of the most important and critical stages under Alabama's death penalty law. The guilt stage has passed. Now an experienced trial judge must consider the particularized circumstances surrounding the offense and the offender and determine if the accused is to die or be sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. It is a due process hearing of the highest magnitude and the exclusionary rules of evidence play no part. The trial evidence must be reviewed to determine all of the aggravating circumstances leading up to and culminating in the death of the victim and then all the mitigating circumstances must be considered in determining if any outweigh the aggravating circumstances so found in the trial court's findings of fact. Unless and until this is done `the trial judge cannot fairly weigh the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, and the appellate court adequately review his sentencing decision.'"”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “In Alabama, the jury is not the body which finally determines which murderers must die and which must not. In fact, Alabama's statute mandatorily requires the court to 'hold a hearing to aid the court to determine whether or not the court will sentence the defendant to death or to life imprisonment without parole,' and specifically provides that the court may refuse to accept the death penalty as fixed by the jury and may 'sentence' the defendant to death or life without parole. Code of Ala.1975, § 13-11-4. That section provides that if the court imposes a 'sentence of death' it must set forth, in writing, the basis for the sentence.”
    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.