856 So. 2d 875 - Hodges v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 29 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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"`"All judges are presumed to be impartial and unbiased. Ex parte Cotton , 638 So.2d 870 (Ala. 1994). `The burden is on the party seeking recusal to present evidence establishing the existence of bias or prejudice.'" Ex parte Grayson , 665 So.2d 986 , 987 (Ala.Cr.App. 1995).' Ex parte Knotts , 716 So.2d 262 [, 266] (Ala.Crim.App. 1998). "`The burden is on the party seeking recusal to present evidence establishing the existence of bias or prejudice. Otwell v. Bryant , 497 So.2d 111 , 119 (Ala. 1986). Prejudice on the part of a judge is not presumed. Hartman v. Board of Trustees , 436 So.2d 837 (Ala. 1983); Duncan v. Sherrill , 341 So.2d 946 (Ala. 1977); Ex parte Rives , 511 So.2d 514 , 517 (Ala.Civ.App. 1986). "`[T]he law will not suppose a possibility of bias or favor in a judge who is already sworn to administer impartial justice and whose authority greatly depends upon that presumption and idea.'" Ex parte Balogun , 516 So.2d 606 , 609 (Ala. 1987), quoting Fulton v. Longshore , 156 Ala. 611 , 46 So. 989 (1908). Any disqualifying prejudice or bias as to a party must be of a personal nature and must stem from an extrajudicial source. Hartman v. Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama , 436 So.2d 837 (Ala. 1983); Reach v. Reach , 378 So.2d 1115 (Ala.Civ.App. 1979). Thus, "`"`[T]he disqualifying prejudice of a judge does not necessarily comprehend every bias, partiality, or prejudice which he may entertain with reference to the case, but must be of a character, calculate”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 858 So. 2d 305 - Jolly v. State · 982 So. 2d 565 - Brown v. State

2. “"The State's evidence tended to show the following. On January 5, 1998, two hunters discovered the nude body of Beth Seaton on the side of County Road 26 in Macon County. The coroner testified that Seaton died as a result of a combination of blunt-force injuries to her head, neck, chest, and abdomen, the most significant being the crushing injuries to her chest and abdomen, which resulted from having been run over by a vehicle. Tire marks ran vertically up and down Seaton's back. A name tag from the Golden Corral Restaurant with Hodges's name on it was found near Seaton's body. "Hodges and Seaton were coworkers at the Golden Corral Restaurant in Opelika. Seaton was a supervisor, and one of her duties was to close the restaurant. Hodges was a crew leader at the restaurant. On January 5, 1998, Trina Eady, another employee at Golden Corral, and Hodges arrived to open the restaurant. The alarm system was deactivated and the safe was open. There was no evidence of a forced entry. They telephoned police. "An investigation led police to Marlo Murph. Murph testified at trial that Hodges suggested robbing the Golden Corral. He said that Hodges told him that Sunday night was the best time because there would be a lot of money in the safe. Murph said that Hodges got the pistol used to murder Seaton from Greg Holstick. The two planned to get to the restaurant while Seaton was closing up. According to Murph, their plans went awry. When they arrived at the restaurant they saw Seaton drivin”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ex Parte Hodges · Hodges v. State

3. “"At the request of a party the court may order witnesses excluded so that they cannot hear the testimony of other witnesses and it may make the order of its own motion. This rule does not authorize exclusion of (1) a party who is a natural person, (2) an officer or employee of a party which is not a natural person designated as its representative by its attorney, (3) a person whose presence is shown by a party to be essential to the presentation of the party's cause, or (4) a victim of a criminal offense or the representative of a victim who is unable to attend, when the representative has been selected by the victim, the victim's guardian, or the victim's family."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 932 So. 2d 923 - Calhoun v. State · 11 So. 3d 866 - Brown v. State