57 Ala. App. 529 - McDonald v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 62 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 75 later decisions — most recently May 2012 · most notably United States v. Girard (1979), United States v. Marmolejo (1996)
7 federal appellate · 62 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 Arellanes v. United States · 49 Ala. App. 259 - Haggler v. State · 17 Ala. App. 674 - Dennison v. State · Gassenheimer v. State · Fall v. United States
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 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"It is well to note however, that although the general rule excludes evidence of similar offenses for the purpose of showing bad character of the accused, exceptions are recognized if relevant for any purpose other than to show a mere propensity by the defendant to commit the crime charged."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"The substance of the offer or promise proved to have been made by the defendant to the juror, Bell, was that he would `chop cotton a week,' if the juror would clear or acquit him. This, in our opinion, was `a gift, gratuity , or thing of value,' within the meaning of the statute. The word thing does not necessarily mean a substance. In its more generic signification it includes an act, or action. So, the word gratuity embraces any recompense, or benefit of pecuniary value. . . . The evil of the offense is its tendency to pervert the administration of justice, by tempting jurors to act contrary to the known rules of honesty and integrity. The promise of the defendant to give his labor or services , as a reward for the corrupt violation of the juror's sworn duty, is a `gift, gratuity, or thing of value,' within the signification of the statute."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"It seems that a bribe must involve something of value that is used to influence action or nonaction. Value, though, is determined by the application of a subjective, rather than an objective, test, and the requirement of value is satisfied if *Page 289 the thing has sufficient value in the mind of the person concerned so that his actions are influenced."”
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.