402 So. 2d 1099 - Weaver v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently July 2012
9 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 Harrington v. State · 364 So. 2d 416 - Chambers v. State · 43 Ala. App. 38 - Lanier v. State · 54 Ala. App. 90 - George v. State · 364 So. 2d 411 - Moore 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"In Shuler v. State , 56 Ala. App. 599 , 324 So.2d 313 , cert. denied, 295 Ala. 418 , 324 So.2d 319 (1975), this court observed that inquiries concerning violent hostile acts *Page 379 by a victim toward someone other than the appellant were not admissible. "In Gamble, McElroy's Alabama Evidence , § 63.01(3), (3d Ed. 1977) we find the following: " 'In some cases where the accused is relying on self-defense he will want to show that the victim had previously committed specific acts of violence toward other persons and that the accused knew of such acts. The purpose of such evidence will be to show the accused's reasonable apprehension of peril. The general rule is that such evidence is admissible if the person toward whom the violence was directed had a very close connection with the accused such that there would be reasonable apprehension of peril on the part of the accused. It is quite clear that such violence towards other persons is not admissible if it is remote in time or lacks any connection in circumstances with the accused.' [Emphasis added] "In the present case, the specific act shown by the appellant at a hearing out of the presence of the jury, occurred from one to ten years before the shooting in question, and only one incident involved a person who the appellant stated was related to him 'a little bit.' Therefore, under these circumstances, we believe that the court was correct in not permitting the appellant to show specific incidents of the victim's dangerous a”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“If the evidence showed that death was caused by a pistol intentionally fired at the person killed, unless self-defense is proved, the offense is either murder or manslaughter.”
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.