651 So. 2d 59 - Hardeman v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 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. ““ ‘It is familiar law that an adverse ruling below is a prerequisite to appellate review.’ CSX Transp., Inc. v. Day, 613 So.2d 883, 884 (Ala.1993). Where the trial court sustains the defendant’s objection, there is ‘no adverse ruling and nothing is preserved for our review.’ Rice v. State, 611 So.2d 1161, 1164 (Ala.Cr.App.1992).””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 892 So. 2d 466 - Chaney v. State · 682 So. 2d 488 - Weaver v. State

2. “" 'A person commits the crime of public intoxication if he appears in a public place under the influence of alcohol, narcotics or other drug to the degree that he endangers himself or another person or property, or by boisterous and offensive conduct annoys another person in his vicinity.' Ala. Code 1975, § 13A-11-10 (a). Although the evidence presented by the State may not have been sufficient to sustain a conviction for public intoxication, that same evidence was sufficient to provide the officers with probable cause to arrest the appellant for that offense. See Parks v. Director, State Department of Public Safety , 592 So.2d 1066 , 1067 (Ala.Civ.App. 1992) ('[a]n acquittal in a DUI case [is] not synonymous with an unlawful arrest'; 'there [may] be a lawful arrest even though there is a finding of "not guilty" of the offense charged'). ' "Probable cause" does not mean that the officers must possess enough evidence in admissible form to convict the person whom they arrest or search.' Yeager v. State , 281 Ala. 651 , 653 , 207 So.2d 125 , 127 (1967), quoting Patenotte v. United States , 266 F.2d 647 (5th Cir. 1959). " 'Probable cause exists if facts and circumstances known to the arresting officer are sufficient to warrant a person of reasonable caution to believe that the suspect has committed a crime. "In dealing with probable cause, however, as the very name implies, we deal with probabilities. These are not technical; they are the factual and practical considerations of e”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 708 So. 2d 144 - Couch v. City of Sheffield

3. “"`"Probable cause exists if facts and circumstances known to the arresting officer are sufficient to warrant a person of reasonable caution to believe that the suspect has committed a crime. `In dealing with probable cause, however, as the very name implies, we deal with probabilities. These are not technical; they are the factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable and prudent men, not legal technicians act....' `"The substance of all the definitions of probable cause is a reasonable ground for belief of guilt."` `Probable cause to arrest is measured against an objective standard and, if the standard is met, it is unnecessary that the officer subjectively believe that he has a basis for the arrest.' The officer need not have enough evidence or information to support a conviction in order to have probable cause for arrest. Only a probability, not a prima facie showing, of criminal activity is the standard of probable cause."'"”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Luckie v. City of Montgomery