520 So. 2d 155 - Hamilton v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “'Pursuant to United States v. Bagley , 473 U.S. 667 , 105 S.Ct. 3375 , 87 L.Ed.2d 481 (1985), undisclosed evidence is material under the Brady rule ( Brady v. Maryland , 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963)) only when it is reasonably probable that the outcome of the trial would have been different had the evidence been disclosed to the defense.' Hamilton v. State , 520 So.2d 155 (Ala.Cr.App. 1986).”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Minor v. State · Davis v. State

2. “"When the testimony of a witness is adverse to the party who called the witness, it is proper for the trial court to allow that party, either for the purpose of proving surprise or to refresh the witness's recollection, to question the witness regarding prior inconsistent statements. Bell v. State, 466 So.2d 167 (Ala.Cr.App.1985); Walker v. State, 416 So.2d 1083 (Ala.Cr.App.1982); Dennard v. State, 405 So.2d 408 (Ala.Cr.App.1981); see also C. Gamble, McElroy's Alabama Evidence, § 165.01(7)(a) (3d ed. 1977). Ordinarily, a suggestion by counsel that he is surprised by the testimony of his own witness is a sufficient basis for the trial court to allow the counsel to elicit testimony regarding the prior inconsistent statement. Junior v. State, 411 So.2d 850 (Ala.Cr.App.1981); Dennard; McElroy's, § 165.01(7)(c)."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 581 So. 2d 536 - Daniels v. State · 594 So. 2d 235 - Summerlin v. State

3. “(1) Was any error adversely affecting the rights of the defendant made in the sentence proceedings? (2) Were the trial court's findings concerning the aggravating and mitigating circumstances supported by the evidence? (3) Was the death penalty the proper sentence in this case?”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 521 So. 2d 1006 - Johnson v. State