Peeples v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““As articulated in Loyd and Phillips, demonstrated falsity is the sine qua non of admissibility of this species of evidence. The State attempts to distinguish the facts of this case from those in Loyd, arguing that ‘the defense made no showing that [J.S.’s] allegations against [her] stepbrother were false.’ Brief in Support of Petition for Writ of Certiora-ri, at 8. We disagree with the State’s characterization of J.S.’s testimony. “J.S.’s statements to the DHR representative that ‘no one had bothered [her] but Mr. Peeples,’ and that no ‘boy was coming into the home pulling down [her] panties and trying to have sex with her,’ expressly refute her earlier allegation, namely, that her stepbrother had ‘pulled her panties down and ... tr[ied] to have sex with her.’ These statements were, in fact, mutually exclusive. In other words, given that J.S. had made allegations of sexual abuse, the denials communicated to the DHR representative were tantamount to admissions that the allegation of sexual abuse was false. J.S.’s denials of the allegation against her stepbrother bring this case, therefore, squarely within the operation of the rule articulated in Ex parte Loyd, 580 So.2d 1374 (Ala.1991). “Because the allegation against [the stepbrother] was demonstrably false, the trial court erred in excluding reference to it in Peeples’s trial.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Sides v. State