548 So. 2d 606 - Adkison v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently September 2014
6 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 Witherspoon v. Illinois · Culombe v. Connecticut · Stein v. People of State of New York Wissner · 387 So. 2d 855 - Eakes v. State · 420 So. 2d 812 - Harris 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The question of whether a confession was voluntary is initially to be determined by the trial court. Thereafter, the voluntariness as affecting the credibility and weight to be given any statement that an accused has made is a determination for the jury. The finding of the trial court will not be disturbed on appeal unless it appears contrary to the great weight of the evidence or is manifestly wrong. Even where there is credible evidence to the contrary, if the evidence is fairly capable of supporting the inference that the rules of freedom and volun-tariness were observed, the ruling of the trial judge need only be supported by substantial evidence and not to a moral certainty. The trial court need only be convinced from a preponderance of the evidence to find a confession has been voluntarily made.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dutton v. State“"The appellant argues that his conviction should be reversed because it was based upon uncorroborated accomplice testimony, in violation of § 12-21-222, Code of Alabama (1975). The appellant made a motion for judgment of acquittal, stating `that the State had not made out a prima facie case....' That ground was sufficient to preserve this matter for our appeal. See Ex parte Maxwell, 439 So.2d 715 (Ala.1983); Fortier v. State, 515 So.2d 101, 104 (Ala.Cr.App.1987)."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Marks v. State“"(a) A person commits the crime of criminal mischief in the first degree if, with intent to damage property, and having no right to do so or any reasonable ground to believe that he has such a right, he inflicts damages to property:”
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.