Pace v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

19 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"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, whether or not brought to the attention of the trial court, and take appropriate appellate action by reason thereof, whenever such error has or probably has adversely affected the substantial right of the appellant."”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Floyd v. State · Lewis v. State

2. “"This Court in Pace , examined the role of the grand-jury foreperson that was discussed in Rose v. Mitchell [, 443 U.S. 545 , 99 S.Ct. 2993 , 61 L.Ed.2d 739 (1979)] and compared that to the role of the grand-jury foreperson in Alabama: "`In Rose , the Supreme Court noted that Tennessee grand jury forepersons, in addition to the ministerial functions of presiding over the grand jury, administering oaths to witnesses, and signing indictments and subpoenas, had a substantive duty to assist the district attorney in the investigation of crimes. 443 U.S. at 548, n. 2 , 99 S.Ct. 2993 . In contrast, Alabama grand jury forepersons have no duty to assist the district attorney in the investigation of crimes and are generally limited to merely reporting grand jury votes and signing the appropriate paperwork prepared by the court or the district attorney. Rule 12.5, Ala. R.Cr.P. "`... Unlike the dominant and authoritative role the Tennessee grand jury foreperson played in Rose , the role of the grand jury foreperson in this case was to perform merely ministerial tasks. The Tennessee grand jury foreperson in Rose had a virtual veto power over the indictment process because under Tennessee law the failure of the foreperson to sign an indictment renders the indictment "fatally defective." 443 U.S. at 548, n. 2 , 99 S.Ct. 2993 . In contrast, the role of a grand jury foreperson in Alabama is so ministerial that even his or her failure to participate in deliberations and to vote with the panel ”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 856 So. 2d 875 - Hodges v. State · 777 So. 2d 225 - Drinkard v. State

3. “"If a defendant makes a timely and valid challenge to his or her indictment based on a violation of equal protection rights occurring as the result of discriminatory selection of the foreperson of the grand jury that returned the indictment, this Court will dismiss the indictment and require that if the State reindicts the accused it do so with a grand jury selected and acting free of any racial discrimination."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 805 So. 2d 733 - Dobyne v. State · 777 So. 2d 225 - Drinkard v. State