706 So. 2d 808 - Huffman v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"A mistrial should be granted only when manifest necessity is demonstrated. Wadsworth v. State, 439 So.2d 790 , 792 (Ala.Cr.App. 1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 930 . . . (1984). It is clear that "`[a] motion for mistrial should not be granted where the prejudicial qualities of the comment can be eradicated by action of the trial court.'" Register v. State, 640 So.2d 3 , 10 (Ala.Cr.App. 1993), aff'd, 680 So.2d 225 (Ala. 1994), quoting Henry v. State, 468 So.2d 896 , 901 (Ala.Cr.App. 1984), cert. denied, 468 So.2d 902 (Ala. 1985). See Stanton v. State, 648 So.2d 638 , 643 (Ala.Cr.App. 1994). `The grant or denial of a mistrial is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court and will only be disturbed upon a showing of manifest abuse.' Roundtree v. State, 461 So.2d 31 , 33 (Ala.Cr.App. 1984). Furthermore, when the `trial court promptly charges the jury to disregard improper remarks, there is a presumption against error and the prejudicial effects thereof are removed.' Parker v. State, 549 So.2d 989 , 992 (Ala.Cr.App. 1989), quoting Haywood v. State, 501 So.2d 515 , 519 (Ala.Cr.App. 1986)."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 922 So. 2d 938 - Flowers v. State · 733 So. 2d 463 - Whitt v. State

2. “"In Ex parte McIntosh , [ 443 So.2d 1283 (Ala. 1983) ], the Alabama Supreme Court listed murder, rape, burglary, robbery , and larceny as '[a]mong those crimes that rise to such a level as to permanently cast doubt on the truthfulness and veracity of those who commit them.' 443 So.2d at 1285 . We do not see how a crime can cast a permanent doubt upon one's truthfulness under the 'moral turpitude' standard and yet not involve dishonesty or false statement under the Alabama Rules of Evidence. We find that the narrow interpretation of 'dishonesty' in federal cases construing Rule 609(a)(2) beggars common sense. Clearly, the crime of theft involves deceit and would directly bear on the ability of the person convicted of the offense to testify truthfully."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Byner v. State (In re Byner) · 742 So. 2d 202 - Sullivan v. State

3. “"(a) General Rule. For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, ".... "(2) evidence that any witness has been convicted of a crime shall be admitted if it involved dishonesty or false statement, regardless of the punishment."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Byner v. State (In re Byner) · 742 So. 2d 202 - Sullivan v. State