574 So. 2d 55 - Buice v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]o preserve an issue for appellate review, it must be presented to the trial court by a timely and specific motion setting out the specific grounds in support thereof. . . . An issue raised for the first time on appeal is not correctly before this court.”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ex Parte Morrow · Bearden v. State

2. “" ' "[A] jury may believe part of the evidence of a witness and reject part." Cochran v. State , 42 Ala. App. 144 , 147 , 155 So.2d 530 , cert. denied, 275 Ala. 693 , 155 So.2d 533 (1963). "In order to convict the defendant the jury was not required to accept as true every statement of the witnesses." Freeman v. State , 37 Ala. App. 623 , 630 , 74 So.2d 513 , cert. denied, 261 Ala. 697 , 74 So.2d 520 (1954). "Conflicting evidence should be reconciled by the jury, if possible, and if they can not reconcile it, they may base their verdict on that part of the testimony which they consider worthy of credit, and reject that which they deem to be unworthy of belief. Inconsistencies and contradictions in the testimony of a witness do not make it inherently improbable." Arnold v. State , 33 Ala. App. 146 , 30 So.2d 587 (1947). "It is not the law that mere contradicting statements or declarations of a witness are sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury *Page 135 as to the truth of the testimony of a witness." Walters v. State , 24 Ala. App. 370 , 373 , 135 So. 600 (1931). " ' "The inconsistencies may impair the credibility of the witness and reduce the weight of the testimony, but they do not destroy the probative force of the testimony as a matter of law — the weight to be given such testimony is for the trier of fact to determine." 30 Am.Jur.2d Evidence § 1082 (1967). " ' "A duty devolves upon the jury, if it can be done, to place that construction upon the e”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Nettles v. State

3. “"Once at the residence, Officer Tucker and the informant knocked on the door, and a man, whom Officer Tucker identified at trial as the appellant, opened the door and let them in. Officer Tucker asked the appellant if he had what they had come for, at which time the informant went back outside and waited in the car. The appellant told Officer Tucker that he would be back in a minute, and he went to a back room. A few minutes later, the appellant returned and handed Officer Tucker a small clear cellophane sandwich bag containing a brown plant material. Officer Tucker took the bag and placed it inside her purse and gave the appellant $35."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 608 So. 2d 411 - Powell v. State