50 Ala. App. 1 - Martin v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"THE APPLICATION OF Thomas J. Carroll, County and Prosecuting Attorney of Laramie County, Wyoming, respectfully represents: "That LARRY EMENS HAGAMAKER stands charged, as appears by the annexed certified copy of complaint with the crime of first degree murder committed in the County of Laramie, State of Wyoming, on or about the 28th day of January, A.D. 1975; said crime having been committed as follows (state facts showing how crime was committed): "Defendant continuously and maliciously beat the victim, Tina Ann Hagamaker over an extended period of time and kept the victim confined to the family home locked in a closet; victim was the ten year old daughter of the Defendant; on the 28th day of January, 1975, the Defendant inflicted a severe beating on the victim; victim thereafter became ill, complained of dizziness and died; Defendant buried the body of the victim under the floor of a shed for approximately four months and then did remove the body, burn it, and scatter the remains, that the said Larry Emens Hagamaker was in the said County and State at the time of the commission of said offense; that before an arrest could be made, to-wit, on or about the 11th day of October, A.D. 1977, he fled from the State of Wyoming, and is now, as your applicant verily believes, in the City (Town) of Decatur, County of Morgan, State of Alabama, a fugitive from the justice of this State, said belief being founded on the following information, to-wit: "Telephone conversations with Sheriff”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Crowell v. State · 354 So. 2d 851 - Hagamaker v. State

2. ““ ‘The general rule seems to be well settled that either a convict who escapes, or one who is released from prison on parole and violates the terms of his parole, may be extradited from another state in which he is found, as a fugitive from justice, on the ground that he is a convict whose time has not expired, and who, therefore, is “charged with crime” under the United States Constitution. [[Image here]] “ ‘No narrow or strained construction should be placed upon the word “charged,” as used in the constitution in the federal statute. It is broad enough to include all classes of persons duly accused of crime. A person can be said to be “charged” with crime as well after his conviction as before....’ ””

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

3. ““A warrant of extradition must not be issued unless the documents presented by the executive authority making the demand show that the accused was present in the demanding state at the time of the commission of the alleged crime and that he thereafter fled from that state and is now in this state, and that he is lawfully charged by indictment or by an information filed by a prosecuting officer and supported by affidavit to the facts, or by affidavit made before a magistrate in that state, with having committed a crime under the laws of that state, or that he has been convicted of crime in that state and has escaped from confinement or broken his parole.””

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