395 So. 2d 489 - King v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
October 1985
most recently cited
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Gilbert v. California · Kirby v. Illinois · 49 Ala. App. 417 - Cornelius v. State · 356 So. 2d 222 - Deloach v. State · 376 So. 2d 834 - Sparks 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"This [the fact that the victim was distraught at the time of the showup] is a circumstance to be considered, but it is not enough to outweigh the other circumstances in favor of the admissibility of the in-court identification, especially in the circumstance of a positive identification by the victim, the absence of any motive on her part to accuse the particular defendant, her corroborated testimony as to his clothing and description and an adequate opportunity to observe him so that she could identify him thereafter." King v. State , 395 So.2d 489 , 491 (Ala.Cr.App. 1981).”
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.