560 So. 2d 1100 - Jackson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently September 2013
8 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 Cassell v. Texas · Warren v. State · 48 Ala. App. 111 - White v. State · 428 So. 2d 167 - Robinson v. State · 445 So. 2d 932 - Ex Parte LaFlore
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Impartiality and fairness require that the defendant be aided by all available processes of the court, when invoked, to enable him to test and question the authenticity of the State's evidence against him. So where the contents of an allegedly prohibited substance [are] in issue and [are] to be offered against him, is it asking too much for the defendant, that he be allowed as much opportunity to determine the nature of the substance and its characteristics as has been afforded the State? We think not, and it is no answer to the question that the State's expert witness is a skillful scientist and a creditable witness. To enable one to present his defense fully and effectively, the right of cross-examination, thorough and sifting, must remain inviolate, and to enable the defendant to invoke this right, on motion, he should be furnished a sample of the allegedly prohibited substance that will be offered against him in the trial so that he can have its qualities researched by scientists of his choosing. We think that to deny him this right is to deny him due process, especially where his motion to produce was made well in advance of the trial so that it could have been ruled on by the court without causing any undue delay in the trial. "”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"Upon motion of the defendant the court shall order the district attorney to permit the defendant to analyze , inspect, and copy or photograph books, papers, documents photographs, tangible objects, controlled substances, buildings or places, or portions of any these things, which are within the possession, custody, or control of the state and: (1) Which are material to the preparation of his defense. . . ."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“This method of jury venire selection has been ratified by this court in Vaughn v. State, 485 So.2d 388 (Ala.Cr.App. 1986).”
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.