green
Positive treatment
Issue: plain errorAL ↗
Issue: invited errorAL ↗
Issue: party cannot allege errorAL ↗
Issue: Burgess claimAL ↗
3.8 score
Treatment trajectory · 1998 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1998
2012
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 15 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Donald Dwayne Whatley v. State of Alabama.
See Williams v. State, 710 So.2d 1276, 1316 (Ala.Crim.App. 1996), affirmed, 710 So.2d 1350 (Ala.1997), cert, denied, Williams v. Alabama, 524 U.S. 929 , 118 S.Ct. 2325 , 141 L.Ed.2d 699 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see"
Snyder v. State
See Rule 45A, Ala.R.App.P. "`In setting out the standard for plain error review of jury instructions, the court in United States v. Chandler, 996 F.2d 1073, 1085, 1097 (11th Cir.1993), cited Boyde v. California, 494 U.S. 370, 380 , 110 S.Ct. 1190 , 108 L.Ed.2d 316 (1990), for the proposition that "an error occurs only when there is a reasonable likelihood that the jury applied the instruction in an improper manner." Williams v. State, 710 So.2d 1276, 1306 (Ala.Cr.App.1996), aff'd, 710 So.2d 1350 (Ala.1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 929 , 118 S.Ct. 2325 , 141 L.Ed.2d 699 (1998).'" Broadnax v. Sta…
discussed
Cited "see"
Martin v. State
See Williams v. State, 710 So.2d 1276 , 1311 (Ala.Crim.App. 1996) (issues initially raised in a motion for a new trial that should have been raised during trial are reviewed on appeal only for plain error), aff'd, 710 So.2d 1350 (Ala. 1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 929 , 118 S.Ct. 2325 , 141 L.Ed.2d 699 (1998).
cited
Cited "see"
Hardy v. State
See Williams v. State, 710 So.2d 1276 (Ala. Crim.App.1996), aff'd, 710 So.2d 1350 (Ala. 1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 929 , 118 S.Ct. 2325 , 141 L.Ed.2d 699 (1998).
cited
Cited "see"
Pressley v. State
See Williams v. State, 710 So.2d 1276 , 1324 (Ala.Cr.App. 1996), aff'd, 710 So.2d 1350 (Ala. 1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 929 , 118 S.Ct. 2325 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
McCray v. State
See also Ex parte Harrell, 470 So.2d 1309 (Ala.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 935 , 106 S.Ct. 269 , 88 L.Ed.2d 276 (1985)....’” “Wilson v. State, 777 So.2d 856, 892 (Ala.Crim.App.1999), quoting Williams v. State, 710 So.2d 1276, 1347 (Ala.Crim.App.1996), aff'd, 710 So.2d 1350 (Ala. 1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 929 , 118 S.Ct. 2325 , 141 L.Ed.2d 699 (1998).” 807 So.2d at 47-48 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lewis v. State
See also Williams v. State, 710 So.2d 1276 (Ala.Crim.App.1996), aff'd, 710 So.2d 1350 (Ala.1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 929 , 118 S.Ct. 2325 , 141 L.Ed.2d 699 (1998) (finding no plain error in the trial court not defining the term "clear and convincing" with respect to the appellant's burden of proving his insanity defense, where it was clear, from the trial court's instructions as a *657 whole, that the jury was not misled as to the appellant's burden of proving his defense).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
McNabb v. State
See, e.g., Williams v. State, 710 So.2d 1276 (Ala.Crim.App.1996), cert. denied, 710 So.2d 1350 (Ala.1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 929 , 118 S.Ct. 2325 , 141 L.Ed.2d 699 (1998); and Owen v. State, 611 So.2d 1126 (Ala.Crim.App.1992).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Jackson v. State
See also Williams v. State, 710 So.2d 1276 (Ala.Cr.App.1996), aff'd, 710 So.2d 1350 (Ala.1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 929 , 118 S.Ct. 2325 , 141 L.Ed.2d 699 (1998); Crapps v. State, 646 So.2d 698 (Ala.Cr.App.1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Jackson v. State
See also Williams v. State, 710 So.2d 1276 (Ala.Cr.App.1996), aff'd, 710 So.2d 1350 (Ala.1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 929 , 118 S.Ct. 2325 , 141 L.Ed.2d 699 (1998); Crapps v. State, 646 So.2d 698 (Ala.Cr.App.1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Freeman v. State
See also Ex parte Harrell, 470 So.2d 1309 (Ala.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 935 , 106 S.Ct. 269 , 88 L.Ed.2d 276 (1985).” Williams v. State, 710 So.2d at 1276, 1347 (Ala.Cr.App.1996), aff'd, 710 So.2d 1350 (Ala.1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 929 , 118 S.Ct. 2325 , 141 L.Ed.2d 699 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Freeman v. State
See also Ex parte Harrell, 470 So.2d 1309 (Ala.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 935 , 106 S.Ct. 269 , 88 L.Ed.2d 276 (1985)." Williams v. State, 710 So.2d at 1276, 1347 (Ala.Cr.App.1996), aff'd, 710 So.2d 1350 (Ala.1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 929 , 118 S.Ct. 2325 , 141 L.Ed.2d 699 (1998).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Carr
See, e.g., United States v. Wolff, 127 F.3d 84, 87 (D.C.Cir.1997), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 2325 , 141 L.Ed.2d 699 (1998); United States v. Travis, 735 F.2d 1129, 1132 (9th Cir.1984).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Carr
See, e.g., United States v. Wolff, 127 F.3d 84, 87 (D.C.Cir.1997), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 118 S.Ct. 2325 , 141 L.Ed.2d 699 (1998); United States v. Travis, 735 F.2d 1129, 1132 (9th Cir.1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Thomas v. State
See also Williams v. State, 710 So.2d 1276, 1308 (Ala.Cr.App.1996), aff'd, 710 So.2d 1350 (Ala.1997), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 929 , 118 S.Ct. 2325 , 141 L.Ed.2d 699 (1998), in which the court quoted United States v. Freeman, 804 F.2d 1574, 1576-77 (11th Cir.1986), in observing that a primary reason the insanity definition in the federal insanity defense statute was altered, after the acquittal of John Hinkley, was that "psychiatrists themselves are unable to agree upon the meaning of `an irresistible impulse.'" It is significant that the experts went beyond the label of a diagnosis and explaine…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Keller
v.
Oklahoma
v.
Oklahoma
No. 97-8608.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 15, 1998.
Published
C. A. 10th Cir. Certio-rari denied.