585 So. 2d 206 - Walters v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “`allowing all reasonable presumptions for its correctness, the preponderance of the evidence against the verdict is so decided as to clearly convince this court that it was wrong and unjust.'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 713 So. 2d 981 - Mitchell v. State · 673 So. 2d 851 - Bright v. State

2. “"`"A warrantless arrest is justifiable, and will be valid if the officer had reasonable or probable cause to effect the arrest at the time that it was made." Foy v. State , 387 So.2d 321 , 324 (Ala.Crim.App. 1980).' "`"In determining whether there was probable cause to arrest, it is not necessary that the officer have before him evidence which would support a conviction for the offense. He must have facts and circumstances within his knowledge which are reasonably trustworthy and which would lead a prudent man to believe that the suspect had committed or was committing an offense." Foy at 324 (quoting Braxton v. State , 350 So.2d 753 , 756 (Ala.Crim.App. 1977). "Probable cause must be judged not with clinical detachment but with a common sense view to the realities of normal life." Musgrove v. State , 519 So.2d 565 (Ala.Crim.App.), aff'd, 519 So.2d 586 (Ala. 1986), cert. denied, 486 U.S. 1036 , 108 S.Ct. 2024 , 100 L.Ed.2d 611 (1988).'"”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 791 So. 2d 1043 - Doggett v. State

3. ““ ‘[Deliberately furtive actions and flight at the approach of strangers or law officers are strong indicia of mens rea, and when coupled with specific knowledge on the part of the officer relating the suspect to the evidence of crime, they are proper factors to be considered in the decision to make an arrest.’ “Sibron [v. New York], 392 U.S. [40,] 66-67, 88 S.Ct. [1889,] 1904 (citations omitted). Professor LaFave has commented upon this language as follows: “‘Thus, if the police see a person in possession of a highly suspicious object or some object which is not identifiable but which because of other circumstances is reasonably suspected to be contraband, and then observe that person make an apparent attempt to conceal that object from police view, probable cause is then present.’ “W. LaFave, 2 Search and Seizure § 3.6(d) at 58 (2d ed.1987).””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Grantham v. City of Tuscaloosa