St. John v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently June 2001
11 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 Strickland v. Washington · Engle v. Isaac · Michel v. State of Louisiana Poret · 362 So. 2d 836 - Ott v. Fox · 51 Ala. App. 426 - State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., Inc. v. Griffin
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'A motion for a mistrial implies a miscarriage of justice and should only be granted where it is apparent that justice cannot be afforded. Young v. State , 416 So.2d 1109 (Ala.Cr.App. 1982). A trial judge is allowed broad discretion in determining whether a mistrial should be declared, because he is in the best position to observe the scenario, to determine its effect upon the jury, and to determine whether the mistrial should be granted. Woods v. State , 367 So.2d 982 (Ala. 1978); Duncan v. City of Birmingham , 384 So.2d 1232 (Ala.Cr.App. 1980); Wadsworth v. State , 439 So.2d 790 (Ala.Cr.App. 1983), cert. denied, Wadsworth v. Alabama , [466] U.S. [930], 104 S.Ct. 1716 , 80 L.Ed.2d 188 (1984). " 'The granting of a mistrial is an extreme measure, and a mistrial should be denied where the prejudicial qualities of the comment can be eradicated by the action of the trial court. Young, supra, Dickey v. State , 390 So.2d 1177 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied , 390 So.2d 1178 (Ala. 1980).' " Dixon v. State , 476 So.2d 1236 , 1240 (Ala.Cr.App. 1985).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“"when one party brings out part of a transaction or conversation, the other party may inquire further into the manner or bring out the whole subject for further examination. Logan v. State , 291 Ala. 497 , 282 So.2d 898 (1973); Hocutt v. State , 344 So.2d 194 (Ala.Crim.App. 1977). This proposition of law, also known as the `rule of completeness,' 7 Wigmore, Evidence §§ 2094-2125 (3d ed. 1940), serves the purpose of allowing a party to explain or rebut adverse inferences which might arise from the fragmentary or incomplete character of the evidence introduced by his adversary. See generally 22A C.J.S. Criminal Law § 660 (1961) and the cases cited therein."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The granting of a mistrial is an extreme measure, and a mistrial should be denied where the prejudicial qualities of the comment can be eradicated by the action of the trial court. Young, supra, Dickey v. State , 390 So.2d 1177 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied , 390 So.2d 1178 (Ala. 1980).”
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.