Marlowe v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
December 2010
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 471 So. 2d 485 - Faircloth v. State · 471 So. 2d 493 - Ex Parte Faircloth · 358 So. 2d 1040 - Bankston v. State · 730 So. 2d 652 - Ex Parte Woodall · Powe v. State
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"`In determining whether serious physical injury has occurred, "neither the jury nor this Court [are] required to ignore `common sense, common reason, and common observation.' Thompson v. State, 21 Ala.App. 498, 499 , 109 So. 557 (1926)." Hale v. State, 654 So.2d 83, 86 (Ala.Crim.App.1994). "`The evidence at trial revealed that Marlowe struck the 75-year-old victim in the head and robbed him of the contents of his wallet. The blow to [the victim's] head rendered him unconscious; he also suffered a laceration to the head requiring closure with metal staples. Two witnesses testified that they saw blood flowing from an open wound on [the victim's] head. Dr. David Keddy, the emergency-room physician who treated [the victim], testified that he suffered from an eight centimeter laceration to the head. The victim was given a CAT scan, and the results showed that the brain was within "normal and acceptable limits." (R. 43.) The wound was closed with metal staples; [the victim] was hospitalized and remained under observation for three days following the incident. "`Dr. Keddy testified that this type of injury could cause serious harm or death, but that he did not consider [the victim's] injuries to be life threatening. Dr. Keddy testified that although he did not think the injuries created a substantial risk of death, it would have been possible for [the victim] to have died if he had not received medical treatment, and that the injuries caused a serious and permanent disfigurement of”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“`The evidence at trial revealed that Marlowe struck the 75-year-old victim in the head and robbed him of the contents of his wallet. The blow to [the victim's] head rendered him unconscious; he also suffered a laceration to the head requiring closure with metal staples. Two witnesses testified that they saw blood flowing from an open wound on [the victim's] head. Dr. David Keddy, the emergency-room physician who treated [the victim], testified that he suffered from an eight centimeter laceration to the head. The victim was given a CAT scan, and the results showed that the brain was within "normal and acceptable limits.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“`This Court's duty is to determine whether there was legally sufficient evidence to support the conviction. Based on Sizemore, James, and Glass , we conclude that the State presented sufficient evidence indicating that the victim suffered "serious physical injury”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.