405 So. 2d 946 - Taylor v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"[T]he Alabama rule is that circumstantial evidence by itself is often satisfactory proof of the corpus delicti of a murder, if the totality of the facts presented would allow the jury to `reasonably' infer the crime. In such cases the questions of a defendant's guilt must be submitted to the jury for their decision. Johnson v. State, 247 Ala. 271 , 24 So.2d 17 (1945); Phillips v. State, 248 Ala. 510 , 28 So.2d 542 (1946); Hoback v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 338 So.2d 439 , cert. denied, Ala., 338 So.2d 444 (1976); Scroggins v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 341 So.2d 967 , cert. denied, Ala., 341 So.2d 972 (1977)."”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 675 So. 2d 1344 - Dansby v. State · 689 So. 2d 227 - O'SHIELDS v. State

2. “"In reviewing a conviction based on circumstantial evidence, this court must view that evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution. The test to be applied is whether the jury might reasonably find that the evidence excluded every reasonable hypothesis except that of guilt; not whether such evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis but guilt, but whether a jury might reasonably so conclude.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 434 So. 2d 289 - Austin v. State