Guthrie v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

17 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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"In Ex parte Jackson , 516 So.2d 768 , 772 (Ala. 1986), the Alabama Supreme Court, without awaiting direction from the United States Supreme Court on this particular issue, 'held as a matter of Alabama constitutional law that this " Batson test" would be applied retroactively to cases pending on direct appeal.' Ex parte Penn , 539 So.2d 319 , 320 (Ala. 1987). See also Ex parte Love , 507 So.2d 979 , 980 (Ala. 1987) ( Batson should not be applied retroactively on collateral review of convictions that became final prior to its announcement); Ex parte Dorsey , 545 So.2d 106 (Ala. 1989) ('We hold that in pre- Batson cases, the issue must have been raised in order to be preserved for review.'). 'In Griffith v. Kentucky , [ 479 U.S. 314 , 107 S.Ct. 708 , 93 L.Ed.2d 649 (1987)], the Supreme Court addressed the retroactive application of Batson , and held that Batson would apply to all cases that were still pending on direct appeal and were not "final" at the time Batson was decided.' Ex parte Floyd , 571 So.2d 1234 , 1236 (Ala. 1990) (footnote omitted)."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Vanderslice v. State · 659 So. 2d 135 - Allen v. State

2. “"Although there was a lengthy voir dire of the venire in this case, the prosecutor did not ask any questions about the relationships made the basis for his peremptory strikes of [certain] veniremembers. . . . The prosecutor's stated basis for his information concerning the various relationships of the veniremembers is vague and suspect. . . . "The importance of a thorough voir dire has repeatedly been stressed by the appellate courts of this state. See, e.g., Jackson v. State , 557 So.2d 855 , 857 (Ala.Cr.App. 1990) ('We reiterate that the fact that the black jurors who were challenged without being examined on voir dire in reference to possible bias because of their employment, position in society, age, and residence raises a strong inference that they were excluded on the basis of race alone.') Here, the total lack of questioning to the challenged veniremembers concerning the basis for their challenges is fatal."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 661 So. 2d 770 - Moore v. State · 612 So. 2d 1304 - Duncan v. State

3. “provided by the appellant was sufficient to establish a prima facie case of discrimination pursuant to Ex parte Branch”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 649 So. 2d 1304 - Kidd v. State