38 Ala. App. 299 - Vinet v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently October 1985 · most notably Thompson v. State (1961), 50 Ala. App. 182 - Whistenant v. State (1973)
25 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 Parsons v. State · Washington v. State · 65 So. 2d 704 - Washington v. State · Childress v. State · Coats 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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““To warrant the granting of a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence it must appear to the court that the evidence so found, if it had been considered by the jury, would have probably changed the result of the trial. (There are other conditions or factors which we need not discuss.) O’Pryor v. State, 237 Ala. 13 , 185 So. 374 ; Washington v. State, 259 Ala. 104, 65 So.2d 704 . “To illustrate our view that there is no merit in this insistence, we have delineated the circumstances incident thereto in some detail. It will be noted that there was a degree of uncertainty on the part of the witnesses with reference to the size of the tracks found at the locale. The evidence does not make it certain that the defendant did not in fact make the tracks. To say the least, the evidence is inconclusive and weak in its tendency to establish the innocence of the accused.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““It was available to the accused to have explained this * * * by his own testimony or by that of other witnesses. It was not required that he testify in the case in order to establish the proof. It follows, therefore, that neither of the statements of the solicitor was necessarily a comment of the defendant’s failure to testify. The appellate courts of this State have held that arguments of this kind and character do not violate the statute prohibiting the solicitor from commenting on the failure of the defendant to testify in his own behalf. Coats v. State, 257 Ala. 406 , 60 So.2d 261 , and numerous cases there cited.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Thompson v. State
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.