669 So. 2d 232 - Bates v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"The appellant contends that the state did not prove that the drug sale occurred within three miles of a school campus, as required for application of § 13A-12-250 , Ala. Code 1975. The state need prove only that the sale occurred within three miles of a school campus `"by a preponderance of the evidence."' Lane [v. State] , supra, 644 So.2d [1318] at 1322 [(Ala.Cr.App. 1994)] (quoting Powell v. State , 600 So.2d 1085 , 1087 (Ala.Cr.App. 1992)). The state introduced an official county map and the supporting testimony of the official mapper for the county tax assessor's office that the drug sale occurred within three miles of *Page 68 [an elementary school]. The appellant offered no contradictory evidence. See Pettway v. State , 624 So.2d 696 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 624 So.2d 700 (Ala. 1993) (the state met its burden of proof under § 13A-12-270 , Ala. Code 1975, by introducing a map and supporting testimony that the drug sale occurred within three miles of public housing project). Cf. Ex parte Johnson , 597 So.2d 1305 (Ala. 1991) (state did not meet its burden of proof under predecessor to § 13A-12-250 because only evidence produced to show distance of school campus from drug sale was unverified map of city that did not indicate scale and state produced no witnesses to support authenticity or accuracy of map). The state met its burden of proof here, and the appellant's sentence was properly enhanced pursuant to § 13A-12-250 ."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Robinson v. State · 724 So. 2d 65 - Merchant v. State

2. “"`[W]hen a qualified and competent witness can testify that the sound recording . . . accurately and reliably represents what the witness sensed at the time in question, then the foundation required is that for the "pictorial communication" theory. Under this theory, the party offering the item must present sufficient evidence to meet the "reliable representation" standard, that is, the witness must testify that the witness has sufficient personal knowledge of the scene or events pictured or the sounds recorded and that the item offered accurately and reliably represents the actual scene or sounds.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 940 So. 2d 371 - Benjamin v. State