Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 580 SO2D 103 - Ray v. State

Ray v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
2
states following
October 1996
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Ex Parte Harrell · 397 So. 2d 203 - Hurst v. State · 470 So. 2d 1303 - Harrell v. State · Ex Parte Hurst · 400 So. 2d 427 - Williams v. State

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

  1. ““First, the appellant claims the state failed to prove intent. This court in Hollis v. State, 417 So.2d 617 (Ala.Crim.App.1982), held that the criminal intent necessary for assault in the first degree may be inferred from the ‘circumstances of violence and brutality.’ In Hollis , the defendant was found guilty of first degree assault for beating his 81-year-old mother. Likewise, in this cause, the appellant’s intent to harm the victim can be inferred from the injuries she suffered.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument.”
    2 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.