Hatcher v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
February 1994
most recently cited
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Ex Parte Cofer · 440 So. 2d 1155 - Brewer v. State · Ex Parte Darby · 507 So. 2d 972 - Anonymous v. State · J.D.S. 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Although in Bowden v. State , supra, the Alabama Supreme Court held that evidence of collateral offenses of rape or sexual abuse of one or more of a defendant's other children may be admissible to prove motive in raping the victim, who is also the defendant's child, this holding appears to have been confined to cases where the appellant is charged with the offense of incest. Thus, the Alabama Supreme Court stated, 'However, where the defendant is not charged with the offense of incest , . . . it becomes questionable whether evidence establishing that the accused raped and/or sexually abused one or more of his other children is admissible to prove his motive in raping the victim, also his child.' [ 538 So.2d at 1235 .] (Emphasis in original.) "In J.D.S. v. State , 587 So.2d 1249 (Ala.Cr.App. 1991), this motive exception was extended to apply to collateral offenses against members of a defendant's family who would fall within the statutory definition of victims of incest, even where the defendant was not charged with that crime, but rather was charged with other sex crimes. In that case, at page 1254 this court noted the separate opinion by Justice Maddox in Bowden v. State , supra, wherein he observed: 'Here, the majority seems to summarily dismiss motive as a viable exception to the general exclusionary rule "where the defendant is not charged with the offense of incest. " . . . Why the extra charge of incest is necessary to allow motive to be shown puzzles me. . . .' 538 So”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the motive exception is not applicable to the present case, as this is not a situation involving incest”
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.