Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 50 Ala. App. 121 - Mitchell v. State

50 Ala. App. 121 - Mitchell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
June 2000
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently June 2000

14 state decisions

701973198019902000decided

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 Swain v. State of Alabama · Smith v. State · Sanders v. State · Ellis v. State · 41 Ala. App. 46 - Lackey 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “". . . We do not sanction the procedure pursued by the state in this case in referring to six pistols with knowledge that the death weapon had not been found. The six pistols constituted a `courtroom arsenal' and had no place in the trial of this case. . . . Had the motion to exclude been limited to all testimony relating to all pistols but the Clark pistol, it would have been reversible error to have overruled the motion."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “It is never proper for a District Attorney to express his personal views as to the guilt of the accused in his summation to the jury. Where, however, the argument . . . constituted mere expression of opinion and deductions and conclusions based upon the evidence and . . . did not appeal to prejudice, [it] was not prejudicial and is not reversible.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Thus, the general rule which we can deduce from this line of cases seems to be that it is improper for the prosecuting attorney on cross-examination to ask defendant's character witnesses questions which assume that defendant did an act tending to prove him guilty of the crime charged.”
    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.