809 So. 2d 875 - Ray v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 14 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ ‘On or about August 16, 1995, Lawrence Milton was operating a tractor and bushhog just off County Road 62 in Dallas County, Alabama. As Mr. Milton went about his duties bushhogging the field, he discovered the skeletal remains of Tiffany Harville, who had been missing since on or about July 15, 1995. “ ‘Tiffany Harville was 15 years of age at the time of her death. Mary Coleman, Tiffany’s mother, described the last time she [had] communicated with her daughter, Tiffany, in July 1995. Mrs. Coleman stated that she, Mrs. Coleman, was leaving town for the evening to attend a Union Workshop. She left Tiffany approximately $6 spending money. Upon Mrs. Coleman’s return to Selma on Sunday afternoon, she discovered that her daughter had not been seen since 8:00 p.m. Saturday night. Mrs. Coleman described the efforts made to locate Tiffany, and further reported that the Defendant, Dominique Ray, came to her house to offer his assistance and share Mrs. Coleman’s concern for her missing daughter. She testified that the Defendant offered to distribute fliers, and at one time, offered reward money to locate Tiffany. On two other occasions before Tiffany’s body was discovered, the Defendant called Mrs. Coleman on the phone to make a general inquiry as to Mrs. Coleman’s condition. “ ‘The investigation into the death of Tiffany Harville continued for several months. There were numerous leads and suspects, and at one time an individual was arrested and held without bond for the murder of Tif”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ray v. Alabama Department of Corrections · 80 So. 3d 965 - Dominique Ray v. State of Alabama.

2. “"In order to justify a challenge for cause, there must be a statutory ground or some matter that imports absolute bias or favor and leaves nothing to the discretion of the trial court. Nettles v. State , 435 So.2d 146 (Ala.Crim.App.), aff'd, 435 So.2d 151 (Ala. 1983). Knowledge of the victim or the victim's family is not among the statutory grounds set out in § 12-16-150 , Ala. Code 1975. Unless a prospective juror indicates that his relationship with the victim would prevent him from being fair and impartial, a challenge for cause should be denied. Dunning v. State , 659 So.2d 995 (Ala.Crim.App. 1994)."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 887 So. 2d 929 - McNabb v. State · 913 So. 2d 460 - Hamm v. State

3. “In United States v. Martinez-Salazar, 528 U.S. 304 , 120 S.Ct. 774 , 145 L.Ed.2d 792 (2000), the defendant used a peremptory challenge to cure the trial court's erroneous denial of a challenge for cause. The United States Supreme Court held that the defendant's right to exercise his peremptory challenges was not denied or impaired when he chose to use a peremptory challenge to remove a juror who should have been challenged for cause.”

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