Evers v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Appellant contends that § 20-2-70 (a) does not apply to licensed physicians. In support of this contention he presents a detailed analysis of the law in several other jurisdictions. We appreciate these attempted analogies with other jurisdictions with allegedly similar statutes, but we find them unpersuasive. "We need not look any further than our own Alabama statutes and cases to reach the conclusion that § 20-2-70 (a) indeed applies to licensed physicians. In fact, § 20-2-70 (a) proscribes certain illegitimate conduct irrespective of the apparent status of the perpetrator. [See State v. Bradford , 368 So.2d 317 , 320 (Ala.Cr.App. 1979)]."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 434 So. 2d 813 - Ex Parte Evers

2. ““(a) Except as authorized by this chapter, any person who possesses, sells, furnishes, gives away, obtains or attempts to obtain by fraud, deceit, misrepresentation or subterfuge or by the forgery or alteration of a prescription or written order or by the concealment of material fact or by use of false name or giving a false address controlled substances enumerated in schedules I, II, III, IV and V is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, for the first offense may be imprisoned for not less than two nor more than 15 years and, in addition, may be fined not more than $25,000.00.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Rudell v. State

3. “The appellant's medical expert was Dr. James Cooper, a friend of the appellant and one of his associates in Atlanta, Georgia, for several years. Dr. Cooper testified that it was `in the course of professional practice and for a legitimate medical purpose' for the appellant to furnish his employee, whom he had known and worked with for six weeks and who was himself a registered pharmacist, the two amphetamine prescriptions to combat fatigue while driving his automobile.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 434 So. 2d 813 - Ex Parte Evers