577 So. 2d 541 - Bradley v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably 659 So. 2d 135 - Allen v. State (1994), 888 So. 2d 532 - Moody v. State (2003)
25 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Manson v. Brathwaite · Santoni v. United States · United States v. Beechum · Anderson v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In all instances, the question is whether the proposed evidence is primarily to prove the commission of another disconnected crime, or whether it is material to some issue in the case. If it is material and logically relevant to an issue in the case, whether to prove an element of the crime, or to controvert a material contention of defendant, it is not inadmissible because in making the proof the commission of an independent disconnected crime is an inseparable feature of it.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage“`Rather than uphold the trial court by straining to neatly fit the evidence of the three prior incidents into the narrow confines of the traditionally recognized categories, we have chosen to review the court's ruling by determining whether the evidence was”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“"`"If a crime is clearly shown to have been committed by the accused, as in the case of one intentionally and without cause striking a deadly blow with an ax, the question of motive would be of little importance. But where the direct evidence is in conflict as to whether the accused did the act, or is partially or wholly circumstantial upon that issue, the question of motive becomes a leading inquiry." "` Fuller v. State, 269 Ala. 312 , 113 So.2d 153, 175 (1959), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 936 , 80 S.Ct. 380 , 4 L.Ed.2d 358 (1960) (quoting Harden v. State, 211 Ala. 656 , 101 So. 442, 444 (1924)). "It is permissible in every criminal case to show that there was an influence, an inducement, operating on the accused, which may have led or tempted him to commit the offense." Bowden v. State, 538 So.2d 1226, 1235 (Ala.1988) (quoting earlier cases, emphasis in Bowden ).'"”
3 later decisions 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.