588 So. 2d 561 - Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
53 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably 651 So. 2d 641 - Burton v. State (1993), 808 So. 2d 1148 - Taylor v. State (2000)
53 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 · Illinois v. Gates · Batson v. Kentucky · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Cuyler v. Sullivan
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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“' " Where the State's evidence does stand uncontradicted , the prosecutor does have the right to point this out to the jury. In that circumstance the prosecutor could say: 'There has been no refutation of any of the evidence presented by the State'; or more simply, 'The State's evidence stands uncontradicted,' or other appropriate comment to like effect.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Arthur v. State · Roper v. State“"No challenge was made at trial to the search of the appellant's house or to his arrest; thus, there is no suggestion of illegality as to these matters in the record. Cf. Ex parte Watkins, 509 So.2d 1074, 1076-77 (Ala.1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 918 , 108 S.Ct. 269 , 98 L.Ed.2d 226 (1987) (wherein the Court, addressing a claim made pursuant to Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), which had been neither raised nor preserved in the record, wrote, `The defendant cannot successfully argue that error is plain in the record when there is no indication in the record that the act upon which the error is predicated ever occurred'); White v. State, 587 So.2d 1218 (Ala.Cr.App.1990), affirmed, 587 So.2d 1236 (Ala.1991) (wherein this court held that an appellant could not raise a claim pursuant to Batson v. Kentucky, supra, where `[t]he record does not even raise the inference of unconstitutional jury selection')."”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The fact that the appellant's case involved capital murder is not alone reason to require individual voir dire.... A trial court's decision in denying individual voir dire examination of a jury panel will not be disturbed on appeal absent an abuse of that discretion.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.