42 Ala. App. 141 - Touchstone v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1963
Citation profile
30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently March 2006 · most notably State v. Fearing (1981), 82 Md. App. 744 - Comstock v. State (1990)
30 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 Griffin Lumber Co. v. Harper · 21 Ala. App. 234 - Jones v. State · Herchenbach v. Commonwealth · 32 Ala. App. 591 - Wilson v. State · 36 Ala. App. 195 - Massengale 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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Now to sustain the charge of leaving the scene of an accident in this case as charged in Count One, the State must prove, one, that Willie Earl James is dead. Two, that Charles Earl Bettis caused the death of Willie Earl James by striking him with a motor vehicle. Three, that Charles Earl Bettis knew or should have known that he caused the death of Willie Earl James. And, four, that the said Charles Earl Bettis, failed to stop the vehicle and render assistance as required by statute. “Now I use the terms ‘knew’ or ‘should have known’. Necessarily (sic) is an essential element of this crime. This does not mean that the person should have possessed knowledge to the extent of damage or injuries inflicted. It does mean that in order to be guilty of violating the statute, the driver must be aware that harm had been done. It must be present in his mind that there has been an injury and then, with that in mind, he must deliberately go away without making hisself (sic) known. If an injury is inflicted under such circumstances, it would ordinarily superinduce belief in a reasonable person that injury would flow or had flowed from the accident or collision then it is the duty of the operator to stop his vehicle. Now, in this case, there are two counts contained in the indictment charging the Defendant in Count One with the offense of leaving the scene of the accident and in Count Two with the offense of manslaughter.” (R. 152-153).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Bettis v. State““Manslaughter in the second degree is defined as the unlawful killing of another human being, without malice and without the intent to kill or to inflict the injury resulting in death, but accidentally committed by the accused while he was doing an unlawful act amounting to a misdemeanor or accidentally, committed by the accused while he was doing a lawful act, but in a grossly negligent manner.” Touchstone v. State, 42 Ala.App. 141 , 155 So.2d 349 ; Wilson v. State, 32 Ala.App. 591 , 28 So.2d 646 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mauldin 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.