568 So. 2d 381 - Gray v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"In the present case, there is no showing that the appellant was unduly prejudiced by the jury's viewing the weapons. In Benford v. State , 435 So.2d 1327 (Ala.Cr.App. 1981)e, the appellant argued that because the jury had an opportunity to view a weapon and a glove, which were not admitted into evidence, he was entitled to a mistrial. This court, however, was not persuaded that the action resulted in any prejudice to the appellant, nor are we persuaded in the instant case that the appellant was prejudiced. " 'An error that might have been prejudicial in a close case does not require reversal when the evidence of the defendant's guilt is strong. Further, in such a case the defendant must show that the trial court's error was, in fact, prejudicial to him. Moreover, before a criminal conviction is to be reversed, it must appeal to the court that the error complained of has probably injuriously affected the substantial rights of the defendant.' "”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 612 So. 2d 1256 - Henderson v. State

2. “When an in-court identification of the accused is shown to have a basis independent of any pre-trial identification, then it is properly admitted into evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 577 So. 2d 541 - Bradley v. State