435 So. 2d 190 - Tate v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
33 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently February 2002 · most notably William v. State (1989), Ex Parte Williams (1987)
33 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 Burgett v. Texas · 346 So. 2d 1177 - Sexton v. State · 405 So. 2d 721 - Yarbrough v. State · 370 So. 2d 736 - Whitt v. State · 414 So. 2d 1014 - Jackson 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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The evidence need not negate the most remote possibility of substitution, alteration, or tampering with the evidence, but rather must prove to a reasonable probability that the item is the same as, and not substantially different from, the object as it existed at the beginning of the chain.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“"Appellant is correct in asserting that a prior conviction without counsel, or an effective waiver thereof, cannot be used by the State as a valid prior conviction for enhancement purposes. Burgett [ v. Texas , 389 U.S. 109 , 88 S.Ct. 258 , 19 L.Ed.2d 319 (1967)]; Thompson v. State , 405 So.2d 717 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 405 So.2d 721 (Ala. 1981). While the State bore the burden of proving a valid prior conviction in which appellant was represented by counsel, it met that burden and established a prima facie case by the introduction of the certified copy of the minute entry. Douglas v. State , 406 So.2d 1051 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 406 So.2d 1053 (Ala. 1981); Crittenden v. State , 414 So.2d 476 (Ala.Cr.App. 1982). When appellant then contended that the former conviction was invalid for enhancement purposes because of lack of representation, he bore the burden of presenting evidence in support thereof. Napier v. State , 344 So.2d 1235 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 344 So.2d 1239 (Ala. 1977)."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Robinson v. State“[T]here is no right to counsel at a preindictment photographic array conducted as part of the identification process for the purpose of permitting a witness to attempt to identify the perpetrator of the crime.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Walker 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.