682 So. 2d 476 - Davis v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"A defendant who is indicted for a capital offense may plead guilty to it, but the state must in any event prove the defendant's guilt of the capital offense beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury. The guilty plea may be considered in determining whether the state has met that burden of proof. The guilty plea shall have the effect of waiving all non-jurisdictional defects in the proceeding resulting in the conviction except the sufficiency of the evidence. A defendant convicted of a capital offense after pleading guilty to it shall be sentenced according to the provisions of Section 13A-5-43 (d)."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 992 So. 2d 686 - Ex Parte Booker · 740 So. 2d 1115 - Davis v. State

2. “"The United States Supreme Court in Sullivan v. Louisiana , 508 U.S. 275 , 278 , 113 S.Ct. 2078 , 2081 , 124 L.Ed.2d 182 (1993), stated that an error in an instruction defining reasonable doubt can never be harmless error. Likewise, the failure to define reasonable doubt and to instruct the jury on the burden of proof during a proceeding in which the appellant pleads guilty to capital murder and in which the State is required by statute to prove the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt cannot be harmless error. `"The inquiry . . . is not whether, in a trial that occurred without the error, a guilty verdict would surely have been rendered, but whether the guilty verdict actually rendered in this trial was surely unattributable to the error." Sullivan v. Louisiana , 508 U.S. 275 , 278 , 113 S.Ct. 2078 , 2081 , 124 L.Ed.2d 182 (1993).' Hutcherson v. State , 677 So.2d 1174 (Ala.Crim.App. 1994)."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 945 So. 2d 1091 - Ex Parte Gillentine

3. “the requirement in § 13A-5-42 that the appellant's guilt be proved beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury is jurisdictional.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 992 So. 2d 686 - Ex Parte Booker