472 So. 2d 671 - Hand v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ ‘The prejudicial effect of communications between jurors and others, especially in a criminal case, determines the reversible character of the error. Whether there has been a communication with the juror and whether it has caused prejudice are fact questions to be determined by the court in the exercise of sound discretion.’ Gaffney v. State, 342 So.2d 403 (Ala.Cr.App.1976), cert. denied, 342 So.2d 404 (Ala.1977); Graham v. State, 339 So.2d 110 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 339 So.2d 114 (Ala.1976); Simms v. State, 56 Ala.App. 156 , 320 So.2d 89 (1975). Moreover, such a ruling by the trial court will not be overturned absent a showing of abuse of discretion. Gaff-ney v. State, supra; Harper v. State, 395 So.2d 150 (Ala.Cr.App.1981).””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 588 So. 2d 559 - Smith v. State · 584 So. 2d 958 - Samuels v. State

2. “[T]he erroneous exclusion of evidence in the first instance can be cured by the subsequent disclosure of substantially the same facts.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 472 So. 2d 675 - Ex Parte Hand