39 Ala. App. 149 - Brown v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

25 state decisions

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.

1. ““On a plea of not guilty to crimes (such as murder, robbery and larceny) which require a special intent, e. g., malice or animus furandi, the law of Alabama allows the jury to consider evidence of a defendant’s drunkenness — not for. the purpose of acquitting him altogether ■ — but for the purpose of ascertaining whether or not his condition has rendered him at the time of the act capable of harboring such special intent. * # * * * * “ * * * However, the trial court will not be put in error for the failure so to charge unless the defendant asks for an appropriate instruction. Code, 1940, Title 7, § 273; Peterson v. State, 227 Ala. 361 , 150 So. 156 ; Burden v. State, 20 Ala.App. 387 , 102 So. 464 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 44 Ala. App. 384 - Grossnickle v. State

2. ““ . . .We have come to the conclusion that the question as to whether or not the defendant, certainly as the chauffeur for his associates, was thereby an aider or abetter — a derivative principal under the statute (Code 1940, Title 14, § 14) — was for the jury. Davis v. State, 36 Ala.App. 573 , 62 So.2d 224 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 55 Ala. App. 629 - Stinson v. State