505 So. 2d 1079 - Freeman v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently May 2003
10 state decisions
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 368 So. 2d 871 - Cumbo v. State · Skelton v. City of Birmingham · Bridges v. State · Day v. State · Colston 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“" ' "In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence the appellate courts of this State are bound by several well settled rules. It is not the function of this Court to decide whether the evidence is believable beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty. Instead, the function of this Court is to determine whether there is legal evidence from which a jury could by fair inference find the defendant guilty. Cumbo v. State , 368 So.2d 871 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 368 So.2d 877 (Ala. 1979); Scruggs v. State , 359 So.2d 836 , 842 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 359 So.2d 843 (Ala. 1978). " ' "In determining the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction, this Court must accept as true the evidence introduced by the State and accord the State all legitimate inferences therefrom. Ellis v. State , 338 So.2d 428 (Ala.Cr.App. 1976); Edson v. State , 53 Ala. App. 460 , 301 So.2d 226 (1974). The evidence must be considered in the light most favorable to the prosecution. Colston v. State , 57 Ala. App. 4 , 325 So.2d 520 (1975), cert. denied, 295 Ala. 398 , 325 So.2d 531 (1976). " ' "Where there is legal evidence from which the jury can by fair inference find the defendant guilty, this Court has no right to disturb the verdict. Bell v. State , 339 So.2d 96 (Ala.Cr.App. 1976). A verdict of conviction will not be set aside on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence, unless, allowing all reasonable presumptions for its correctness, the preponderance of the evidence against”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“Statements and declarations of a deceased are not competent evidence for or against an accused in a murder prosecution unless made in his presence, or unless they are admitted in evidence as part of the res gestae or constitute dying declarations.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Martin v. State
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.