555 So. 2d 305 - Chatman v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
June 1995
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 46 Ala. App. 722 - Parks v. State · 366 So. 2d 740 - Temple v. State · 46 Ala. App. 36 - Rueffert v. State · 435 So. 2d 1365 - Ex Parte Story · Roberts 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘[T]he mere presence of a defendant in an automobile containing contraband is not sufficient in and of itself to support a conviction for possession of a controlled substance. Parks v. State, 46 Ala.App. 722 , 248 So.2d 761 (1971); Rueffert v. State, 46 Ala.App. 36 , 237 So.2d 520 (1970). The State must introduce additional evidence from which the defendant’s unlawful possession of the contraband could be inferred in order to support a conviction. See 57 A.L.R.3d 1319 . Knowledge of the presence of the controlled substance must also be established beyond a reasonable doubt. Temple v. State, 366 So.2d 740 (Ala.Cr.App.1978).’ “[Ex parte] Story, 435 So.2d [1365] at 1366 [ (Ala.Crim.App.1983) ].””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. D.B. 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.