42 Ala. App. 85 - Willis v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1963
Citation profile
34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently February 1983 · most notably 366 So. 2d 336 - Summers v. State (1978), Thomas v. State (1966)
34 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 Mapp v. Ohio · Griffin v. People of the State of Illinois · Draper v. Washington · Lane v. Brown · Eskridge v. Washington State Board of Prison Terms & Paroles
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is clear from Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12 , 76 S.Ct. 585 , 100 L.Ed. 891 ; Eskridge v. Washington State Bd. of Prison Terms & Paroles, 357 U.S. 214 , 78 S.Ct. 1061 , 2 L.Ed. 1269 ; and Draper v. Washington, 372 U.S. 487 , 83 S.Ct. 774 , 9 L.Ed.2d 899 , that the Supreme Court of the United States has not required a state to furnish a poor man a full transcript of ALL the evidence. All that is required for a main trial is some unbiased narrative or recital which gives the background (‘stenographic support or its equivalent’) to illumine the appellant’s question or questions reserved for consideration on review for error. “Under Griffin v. Illinois, supra, a state is not dispensing red beribboned souvenirs or mementos. Rather the convicted pauper is entitled to essential parts of the transcript (or a substitute) because of his need to show the appellate court the setting of the rulings below.””
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.