710 So. 2d 511 - Knight v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The ground that a jury instruction is a correct statement of the law is insufficient to preserve an objection to the trial court's refusal to give the instruction.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ex Parte RDW · Vaughan v. Oliver

2. ““The granting or denying of a motion for new trial rests largely within the discretion of the trial court, and the exercise of that discretion carries with it a presumption of correctness that will not be disturbed on appeal unless some legal right was abused and the record plainly and palpably shows that the trial court was in error.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. W.G.M. v. State · S.A.J. v. State

3. “`The test for determining whether juror misconduct is prejudicial to the defendant and, thus, warrants a new trial is whether the misconduct might have unlawfully influenced the verdict rendered. Ex parte Troha, 462 So.2d 953, 954 (Ala.1984); Roan [v. State ] 225 Ala. 428, 435 , 143 So. 454, 460 (1932); Leith [v. State ] 206 Ala. 439, 443 , 90 So. 687, 690 (1921). Once the trial court investigates the misconduct and finds, based on competent evidence, the alleged prejudice to be lacking, this Court will not reverse. See Bascom v. State, 344 So.2d 218, 222 (Ala.Cr.App.1977).'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 723 So. 2d 822 - Reynolds v. City of Birmingham · 809 So. 2d 841 - Apicella v. State