49 Ala. App. 482 - Cameron v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
24
cited by 24 later decisions
1
states following
June 1982
most recently cited
24 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Skumro v. State · 30 Ala. App. 304 - Moore v. State · Slayton v. State · Dailey 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It should be kept in mind that corrobo-' rative evidence of an accomplice is of two kinds. One includes facts and circumstances ascertained in checking up on his version of the affair, matters tending to support the truth of his testimony, or vice versa. The competency of this class of circumstantial evidence does not turn on whether it tends to conduct the defendant with the crime. The other class, one essential to conviction, is corroborative evidence which does tend to connect the defendant with the crime. This latter class must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. As to the other, the jury may not believe the evidence of the accomplice beyond a reasonable doubt with respect to details, but still believe his evidence on the facts essential to a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt, and, if corroborated as the law requires, a conviction should follow. * * * ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Under the statute requiring corroboration of the testimony of accomplices to authorize conviction of a felony (Title 15, Section 307, Code of Alabama 1940), the corroborative evidence need not be strong, nor sufficient of itself to support the conviction, the criterion being that it legitimately tends to connect the accused with the offense. 23 C.J.S. Criminal Law § 812(5), page 125; Moore v. State, 30 Ala.App. 304 , 5 So.2d 644 . “Nor need such corroborative evidence directly confirm any particular fact stated by the accomplices. Skumro v. State, 234 Ala. 4 , 170 So. 776 .””
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.