Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 44 Ala. App. 229 - Ward v. State

44 Ala. App. 229 - Ward v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1966

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
1
states following
December 2008
most recently cited

47 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently December 2008 · most notably 50 Ala. App. 176 - Thigpen v. State (1973), 52 Ala. App. 64 - Flurry v. State (1973)

47 state decisions

30019661970198019902000decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Mapp v. Ohio · Escobedo v. Illinois · Dennis v. United States · Durham v. United States

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

  1. “"Carefully analyzing the operation of § 52, supra , as construed by cases such as New York Times v. Sullivan , 273 Ala. 656 , 144 So.2d 25 , and Aaron v. State , 273 Ala. 337 , 139 So.2d 309 , we consider that our Supreme Court has avulsed the mandatory `shall have the right' twice used in § 52 into a mere precatory adjuration to the humane instincts of the trial judge. The question of the voir dire examination of would be jurors allowed or disallowed below is not subject to review on appeal. Rose v. Magro , 220 Ala. 120 , 124 So. 296 (hn. 10). (Italics added.)"”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"In civil and criminal cases, either party shall have the right to examine jurors as to their qualifications, interest, or bias that would affect the trial of the case, and shall have the right, under the direction of the court , to examine said jurors as to any matter that might tend to affect their verdict." (Emphasis supplied.)”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “'is of doubtful propriety, certainly where one aspect of the putative evidence is singled out. . . .' Ward v. State , 44 Ala. App. 229 , 253 , 206 So.2d 897 , 921 (1966), cert. denied, 281 Ala. 650 , 206 So.2d 922 (1967).”
    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.