695 So. 2d 199 - Pardue 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. “"`Although the appellant's statement was wrongfully received into evidence because it was coerced, the analysis does not end. The question becomes: Was the receipt of the statement into evidence harmless error? In Arizona v. Fulminante , 499 U.S. 279 , 111 S.Ct. 1246 , 113 L.Ed.2d 302 (1991), the United States Supreme Court held that the harmless error doctrine could be applied to coerced confessions received into evidence at trial. That Court stated: "`"When reviewing the erroneous admission of an involuntary confession, the appellate court, as it does with the admission of other forms of improperly admitted evidence, simply reviews the remainder of the evidence against the defendant to determine whether the admission of the confession was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt." "` 499 U.S. at 310 , 111 S.Ct. at 1265 , 113 L.Ed.2d at 332 . (Emphasis added.) "In order for the harmless error doctrine to be applied in this situation, the evidence against the accused must be overwhelming." McCray [v. State] , 629 So.2d [729] at 732 [(Ala.Cr.App. 1993)]; Smith v. State , 623 So.2d 369 , 372 (Ala.Cr.App. 1992), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1030 , 114 S.Ct. 650 , 126 L.Ed.2d 607 (1993).' " Fisher v. State , 665 So.2d 1014 , 1018 (Ala.Cr.App. 1995)."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 819 So. 2d 91 - Richardson v. State

2. “"The appellant was originally charged with three murders that occurred between midnight and 6:00 a.m. on May 22, 1973. Two of the murders took place in Mobile County and one in Baldwin County. On October 24, 1973, the appellant pleaded guilty in Mobile Circuit Court to first degree murder for the murder of William Harvey Hodges and Theodore Roosevelt White. The appellant was convicted after a jury trial in Baldwin County Circuit Court for the murder of Ronald Rider. That conviction was reversed by the Alabama Supreme Court in Ex parte Pardue, 661 So.2d 268 (Ala. 1994). On December 16, 1994, pursuant to a petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging the voluntariness of his confession, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama overturned the Mobile convictions for the murders of Hodges and White. The Federal court gave the State of Alabama 180 days to retry the appellant or dismiss the indictments. Pardue was reindicted for the murder of Hodges and the State nol-prossed the charge for the murder of White because vital witnesses had died."”

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

3. “[t]he defendant's personal characteristics as well as his prior experience with the criminal justice system are factors to be considered in determining [the defendant's] susceptibility to police pressures.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 718 So. 2d 727 - McLeod v. State