43 Ala. App. 642 - Carr v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently March 1996 · most notably Commonwealth v. Mutina (1975), 52 Ala. App. 422 - Pierce v. State (1973)
2 federal appellate · 44 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 Phillips v. State · Parsons v. State · Boyle v. State · George v. State · Parrish 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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The question of insanity at the time of the commission of a crime is a matter to be determined by the jury from a consideration of all the evidence. The defendant in this case is presumed to be sane, and the burden of establishing his insanity to the reasonable satisfaction of the jury rests upon him. Title 15, Sec. 422, Code of Alabama 1940. See Boyle v. State, 229 Ala. 212 , 154 So. 575 ; Pickett v. State, 37 Ala.App. 410 , 71 So.2d 102 , cert. den. 260 Ala. 699 , 71 So.2d 107 . In the Pickett case, supra, the cohrt said: “ ‘Even undisputed expert medical evidence is not conclusive upon the jury, but must be weighed like other evidence, and may be rejected by the jury. Hockenberry v. State, 246 Ala. 369 , 20 So.2d 533 ; Fitzhugh v. State, 35 Ala.App. 18 , 43 So.2d 831 , certiorari denied 253 Ala. 246 , 43 So.2d 839 , certiorari denied 339 U.S. 986 , 70 S.Ct. 1007 , 94 L.Ed. 1388 .’ ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Orforda v. State · Luster 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.