Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 507 So. 2d 972 - Anonymous v. State

507 So. 2d 972 - Anonymous v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
2
states following
May 2014
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 44 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently May 2014 · most notably McKinney v. Rees (1993), Bowden v. State (1988)

3 federal appellate · 44 state decisions

2501987199020002010decided

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 Ex Parte Cofer · Lee v. State · Terry v. State · Brasher v. State · Ingram 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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Application of this rule and its exceptions to the facts of the present case makes it clear that the Court of Criminal Appeals correctly determined that the evidence of the prosecutrix's pregnancy and her abortions and the sister's pregnancy and resulting child was inadmissible. There is simply no imaginable reason for the admission of this testimony other than to prove the defendant's bad character. This is, of course, not an acceptable purpose. See Brasher v. State , 249 Ala. 96 , 30 So.2d 31 (1947).”
    22 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “one cannot escape the conclusion that there exists no exception upon which the admissibility of the testimony concerning the prior sexual mistreatment of the defendant's daughters could be based.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Evidence of prior bad acts of a criminal defendant is presumptively prejudicial to the defendant. It interjects a collateral issue into the case which may divert the minds of the jury from the main issue. . . . Therefore, the admission of such evidence constitutes reversible error.”
    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.