589 So. 2d 769 - Hendrix v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently February 2010
9 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 Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Bagley · Raphan v. United States · Zerman v. Melton · Yamanis v. United States
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'Where there is evidence of separate and distinct acts constituting separate criminal offenses, separate convictions and sentences may be legally had under multiple counts of an indictment.' " Hendrix v. State , 589 So.2d 769 , 772 (Ala.Cr.App. 1991) ("The State's evidence indicated that A.C. was made to perform at least two acts of oral sex on the appellant. This evidence was sufficient to prove sodomy. See § 13A-6-63 (1975). The State's evidence also revealed that the appellant licked A.C.'s buttocks, put his finger into her 'private,' and tried to put his penis into her vagina. (R. 26.) This evidence was sufficient to prove sexual abuse. See § 13A-6-66 . Thus, the sodomy and the sexual abuse were separate and distinct crimes which arose as a result of different conduct. The appellant did not receive multiple punishments for the same offense.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The evidence is material only if there is a reasonable probability that, had the evidence been disclosed to the defense, the result of the proceeding would have been different. A 'reasonable probability' is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““ ‘Three elements must be proven in order to establish a violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). These elements include 1) the prosecution’s suppression of evidence; 2) the favorable character of the suppressed evidence for the defense; and 3) the materiality of the suppressed evidence. Brady, 373 U.S. at 87 , 83 S.Ct. at 1196-97 .’ ””
1 later decision 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.