698 So. 2d 151 - Trawick v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 10 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"`Those principles may be summarized as follows: "`1. By statute, there is a presumption of sanity extending to all persons over the age of 14. "`2. The defense of insanity is an affirmative defense. The burden of proving this defense rests upon the defendant and never shifts to the state. "`3. The burden upon the defendant is to establish the issue of legal insanity by a preponderance of the evidence and to the reasonable satisfaction of the jury. [Now, under Ala.Code § 13A-3-1(c), "[t]he defendant has the burden of proving the insanity defense by clear and convincing evidence."] "`4. The question of insanity at the time of the commission of the crime is a matter to be determined by the jury from a consideration of all the evidence. "`5. In making its determination, the jury may reject all expert testimony though it is without conflict. "`6. However, opinion testimony, even of experts must be weighed by the jury and may not be arbitrarily ignored. "`.... "`The one exception to these rules is found in those cases where the proof of insanity is overwhelming and uncontradicted. "`"Cases of insanity may be so clear, the proof so strong and undisputed, that the jury should be instructed in like form." Boyle v. State, 229 Ala. 212, 222 , 154 So. 575, 583 (1934).' " Herbert v. State, 357 So.2d 683, 688-89 (Ala.Cr.App.[1978]) (bracketed material added [in Dixon ])."”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Janezic v. State · Dunaway v. State

2. “"In all cases in which the death penalty has been imposed, the Court of Criminal Appeals shall notice any plain error or defect in the proceedings under review . . . whenever such error has or probably has adversely affected the substantial right of the appellant."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Dunaway v. State · 60 So. 3d 326 - Morris v. State

3. “"Does not exist. The defendant's psychiatric history, detailed at trial through the pleas of not guilty by reason of severe mental disease or defect, does not suggest that his offense against James Patterson, committed in January 1997, occurred during a period that the defendant was under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance. In January 1997, and before, defendant was holding down a job, his boss testifying that defendant was lucid and normal."”

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