Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
28 Alabama opinions name it 1 courts 1990–2025 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alabama courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Davis v. Stategreen2 sentences2025App. 1999). ' "When the door is opened by defense counsel's argument, it swings wide, and a number of areas barred to prosecutorial comment will suddenly be subject to reply." ' Davis v. State, 494 So. 2d 851, 855 (Ala. Crim. 2024App. 1999). ' "When the door is opened by defense counsel's argument, it swings wide, and a number of areas barred to prosecutorial comment will suddenly be subject to reply." ' Davis v. State, 494 So. 2d 851, 855 (Ala. Crim. | 17 | 25 |
Thompson v. Stategreen2 sentences2025App. 1986)." Thompson v. State, 153 So. 3d 84, 174 (Ala. Crim. 2024App. 1986)." Thompson v. State, 153 So. 3d 84, 174 (Ala. Crim. | 2 | 2 |
Wysinger v. Stategreen2 sentences2010Whitlow v. State, 509 So.2d 252, 256 (Ala.Cr.App.1987); Wysinger v. State, 448 So.2d 435, 438 (Ala.Cr.App.1983); Carpenter v. State, 404 So.2d 89, 97 (Ala.Cr.App.1980), cert. denied, 404 So.2d 100 (Ala.1981). 2007Whitlow v. State, 509 So.2d 252, 256 (Ala.Cr.App.1987); Wysinger v. State, 448 So.2d 435, 438 (Ala.Cr.App.1983); Carpenter v. State, 404 So.2d 89, 97 (Ala.Cr.App.1980), cert. denied, 404 So.2d 100 (Ala.1981). | 2 | 2 |
Whitlow v. Stategreen2 sentences2010Whitlow v. State, 509 So.2d 252, 256 (Ala.Cr.App.1987); Wysinger v. State, 448 So.2d 435, 438 (Ala.Cr.App.1983); Carpenter v. State, 404 So.2d 89, 97 (Ala.Cr.App.1980), cert. denied, 404 So.2d 100 (Ala.1981). 2007Whitlow v. State, 509 So.2d 252, 256 (Ala.Cr.App.1987); Wysinger v. State, 448 So.2d 435, 438 (Ala.Cr.App.1983); Carpenter v. State, 404 So.2d 89, 97 (Ala.Cr.App.1980), cert. denied, 404 So.2d 100 (Ala.1981). | 2 | 2 |
Carpenter v. Stategreen2 sentences2010Whitlow v. State, 509 So.2d 252, 256 (Ala.Cr.App.1987); Wysinger v. State, 448 So.2d 435, 438 (Ala.Cr.App.1983); Carpenter v. State, 404 So.2d 89, 97 (Ala.Cr.App.1980), cert. denied, 404 So.2d 100 (Ala.1981). 2007Whitlow v. State, 509 So.2d 252, 256 (Ala.Cr.App.1987); Wysinger v. State, 448 So.2d 435, 438 (Ala.Cr.App.1983); Carpenter v. State, 404 So.2d 89, 97 (Ala.Cr.App.1980), cert. denied, 404 So.2d 100 (Ala.1981). | 2 | 2 |
| Henderson v. Stategreen | 2 | 2 |
VanPelt v. Stategreen2 sentences2015Defense counsel had stated: “Life without the possibility of parole will make sure that nothing ever happens at the hands of Mr. Bohannon again ... it will be a deterrent as well.” (R. 1652.) “It is well settled that ‘[a] prosecutor has the right to “reply in kind” to statements made by defense counsel in the defense’s closing argument.’ Newton v. State, [ 78 So.3d 458 , 478] (Ala.Crim.App.2009) (citations and quotations omitted). ‘ “When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it swings wide, and a number of areas barred to prosecutorial comment will suddenly be subject to reply.” ’ 2014Won’t be any more holidays shared with him, even if he is in prison, because he’s gone, and he’s gone because of that man right there.” (R. 1083-84.) This Court has held: “It is well settled that ‘[a] prosecutor has the right to “reply in kind” to statements made by defense counsel in the defense’s closing argument.’ Newton v. State, [ 78 So.3d 458, 478 ] (Ala.Crim.App.2009) (citations and quotations omitted). ‘“When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it swings wide, and ■"& number of areas barred to prosecutorial comment will suddenly be subject to reply.” ’ Davis v. State, 494 | 1 | 3 |
Ballards v. Stategreen2 sentences2015Your community." (R. 988.) It is well settled that "[a] prosecutor has the right to 'reply in kind' to statements made by defense counsel in the defense's closing argument." Newton v. State , 78 So.3d 458 , 478 (Ala.Crim.App.2009) (citations and quotations omitted.) "This 'reply-in-kind' doctrine is based on fundamental fairness." Ballard v. State , 767 So.2d 1123 , 1135 (Ala.Crim.App.1999) (citing Ex parte Rutledge , 482 So.2d 1262 , 1264 (Ala.1984) ). " 'When the door is opened by defense counsel's argument, it swings wide, and a number of areas barred to prosecutorial comment will suddenly 2012This ‘reply-in-kind’ doctrine is based on fundamental fairness.” Ballard v. State, 767 So.2d 1123, 1135 (Ala.Crim.App.1999). “ ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it swings wide, and a number of areas barred to prosecutorial comment will suddenly be subject to reply.’” Davis v. State, 494 So.2d 851, 855 (Ala.Crim.App.1986). 20 In upholding a prosecutor’s argument— in reply — that a defendant should be sentenced to death in accordance with God’s law, we stated: “We find that the prosecutor’s comments, when taken in context with the entire closing arguments, were proper as a | 1 | 2 |
Minor v. Stategreen2 sentences2015Thus, "[a] prosecutor has a right based on fundamental fairness to reply in kind to" defense counsel's "Biblical argument." Minor v. State , 914 So.2d 372 , 428 (Ala.Crim.App.2004) (citations and quotations omitted). 2007The rule in Alabama is that ‘remarks or comments of the prosecuting attorney, including those which might otherwise be improper, are not grounds for reversal when they are invited, provoked, or occasioned by accused’s counsel and are in reply to or retaliation for his acts and statements.’ Shewbart v. State, 33 Ala. App. 195 , 32 So.2d 241 , cert. denied, 249 Ala. 572 , 32 So.2d 244 (1947); Camper v. State, 384 So.2d 637 (Ala.Crim.App.1980); Wilder v. State, 401 So.2d 151 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 401 So.2d 167 (Ala.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1057 , 102 S.Ct. 606 , 70 L.Ed.2d 595 (1981 | 1 | 2 |
| Chatom v. Stategreen | 1 | 2 |
| McGowan v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Brooks v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Knight v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Blackmon v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| George v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Rutledge v. State
green
2 sentences2004The rule in Alabama is that `remarks or comments of the prosecuting attorney, including those which might otherwise be improper, are not grounds *425 for reversal when they are invited, provoked, or occasioned by accused's counsel and are in reply to or retaliation for his acts and statements.' Shewbart v. State, 33 Ala.App. 195 , 32 So.2d 241 , cert. denied, 249 Ala. 572 , 32 So.2d 244 (1947); Camper v. State, 384 So.2d 637 (Ala.Crim.App.1980); Wilder v. State, 401 So.2d 151 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 401 So.2d 167 (Ala.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1057 , 102 S.Ct. 606 , 70 L.Ed.2d 595 ( 2002This court in Stephens v. State, 580 So.2d 11 (Ala.Cr.App.1990), aff'd, 580 So.2d 26 (Ala.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 859 , 112 S.Ct. 176 , 116 L.Ed.2d 138 (1991), stated the following with regard to a prosecutor's statements in arguments: "`" ... `[I]t must be examined in its context and in light of what had transpired, that is, in light of preceding argument of defense counsel, to which the prosecutor's argument was an answer.' Washington v. State, 259 Ala. 104 , 65 So.2d 704 (1953); Gibson v. State, 347 So.2d 576 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); Rutledge v. State, [ 482 So.2d 1250 ] (Ala.Crim.App.1983). | 6 | 1992–2004 |
Stephens v. State
green
2 sentences2002This court in Stephens v. State, 580 So.2d 11 (Ala.Cr.App.1990), aff'd, 580 So.2d 26 (Ala.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 859 , 112 S.Ct. 176 , 116 L.Ed.2d 138 (1991), stated the following with regard to a prosecutor's statements in arguments: "`" ... `[I]t must be examined in its context and in light of what had transpired, that is, in light of preceding argument of defense counsel, to which the prosecutor's argument was an answer.' Washington v. State, 259 Ala. 104 , 65 So.2d 704 (1953); Gibson v. State, 347 So.2d 576 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); Rutledge v. State, [ 482 So.2d 1250 ] (Ala.Crim.App.1983). 2001Recently, this Court, in Stephens [v. State], 580 So.2d 11 (Ala.Crim.App. 1990), aff'd, 580 So.2d 26 (Ala.1991)[,] stated the following regarding prosecutor's statements and arguments: "`"... `[I]t must be examined in its context and in light of what had transpired, that is, in light of preceding argument of defense counsel, to which the prosecutor's argument was an answer.' Washington v. State, 259 Ala. 104 , 65 So.2d 704 (1953); Gibson v. State, 347 So.2d 576 (Ala.Crim.App. 1977); Rutledge v. State, [ 482 So.2d 1250 ] (Ala.Crim.App.1983). | 6 | 1992–2002 |
Washington v. State
green
2 sentences2002This court in Stephens v. State, 580 So.2d 11 (Ala.Cr.App.1990), aff'd, 580 So.2d 26 (Ala.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 859 , 112 S.Ct. 176 , 116 L.Ed.2d 138 (1991), stated the following with regard to a prosecutor's statements in arguments: "`" ... `[I]t must be examined in its context and in light of what had transpired, that is, in light of preceding argument of defense counsel, to which the prosecutor's argument was an answer.' Washington v. State, 259 Ala. 104 , 65 So.2d 704 (1953); Gibson v. State, 347 So.2d 576 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); Rutledge v. State, [ 482 So.2d 1250 ] (Ala.Crim.App.1983). 2001Recently, this Court, in Stephens [v. State], 580 So.2d 11 (Ala.Crim.App. 1990), aff'd, 580 So.2d 26 (Ala.1991)[,] stated the following regarding prosecutor's statements and arguments: "`"... `[I]t must be examined in its context and in light of what had transpired, that is, in light of preceding argument of defense counsel, to which the prosecutor's argument was an answer.' Washington v. State, 259 Ala. 104 , 65 So.2d 704 (1953); Gibson v. State, 347 So.2d 576 (Ala.Crim.App. 1977); Rutledge v. State, [ 482 So.2d 1250 ] (Ala.Crim.App.1983). | 5 | 1992–2002 |
Stephens v. State
green
2 sentences2002This court in Stephens v. State, 580 So.2d 11 (Ala.Cr.App.1990), aff'd, 580 So.2d 26 (Ala.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 859 , 112 S.Ct. 176 , 116 L.Ed.2d 138 (1991), stated the following with regard to a prosecutor's statements in arguments: "`" ... `[I]t must be examined in its context and in light of what had transpired, that is, in light of preceding argument of defense counsel, to which the prosecutor's argument was an answer.' Washington v. State, 259 Ala. 104 , 65 So.2d 704 (1953); Gibson v. State, 347 So.2d 576 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); Rutledge v. State, [ 482 So.2d 1250 ] (Ala.Crim.App.1983). 2001Recently, this Court, in Stephens [v. State], 580 So.2d 11 (Ala.Crim.App. 1990), aff'd, 580 So.2d 26 (Ala.1991)[,] stated the following regarding prosecutor's statements and arguments: "`"... `[I]t must be examined in its context and in light of what had transpired, that is, in light of preceding argument of defense counsel, to which the prosecutor's argument was an answer.' Washington v. State, 259 Ala. 104 , 65 So.2d 704 (1953); Gibson v. State, 347 So.2d 576 (Ala.Crim.App. 1977); Rutledge v. State, [ 482 So.2d 1250 ] (Ala.Crim.App.1983). | 5 | 1993–2002 |
Gibson v. State
green
2 sentences2002This court in Stephens v. State, 580 So.2d 11 (Ala.Cr.App.1990), aff'd, 580 So.2d 26 (Ala.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 859 , 112 S.Ct. 176 , 116 L.Ed.2d 138 (1991), stated the following with regard to a prosecutor's statements in arguments: "`" ... `[I]t must be examined in its context and in light of what had transpired, that is, in light of preceding argument of defense counsel, to which the prosecutor's argument was an answer.' Washington v. State, 259 Ala. 104 , 65 So.2d 704 (1953); Gibson v. State, 347 So.2d 576 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); Rutledge v. State, [ 482 So.2d 1250 ] (Ala.Crim.App.1983). 2001Recently, this Court, in Stephens [v. State], 580 So.2d 11 (Ala.Crim.App. 1990), aff'd, 580 So.2d 26 (Ala.1991)[,] stated the following regarding prosecutor's statements and arguments: "`"... `[I]t must be examined in its context and in light of what had transpired, that is, in light of preceding argument of defense counsel, to which the prosecutor's argument was an answer.' Washington v. State, 259 Ala. 104 , 65 So.2d 704 (1953); Gibson v. State, 347 So.2d 576 (Ala.Crim.App. 1977); Rutledge v. State, [ 482 So.2d 1250 ] (Ala.Crim.App.1983). | 5 | 1992–2002 |
Washington v. State
neutral
2 sentences2002This court in Stephens v. State, 580 So.2d 11 (Ala.Cr.App.1990), aff'd, 580 So.2d 26 (Ala.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 859 , 112 S.Ct. 176 , 116 L.Ed.2d 138 (1991), stated the following with regard to a prosecutor's statements in arguments: "`" ... `[I]t must be examined in its context and in light of what had transpired, that is, in light of preceding argument of defense counsel, to which the prosecutor's argument was an answer.' Washington v. State, 259 Ala. 104 , 65 So.2d 704 (1953); Gibson v. State, 347 So.2d 576 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); Rutledge v. State, [ 482 So.2d 1250 ] (Ala.Crim.App.1983). 2001Recently, this Court, in Stephens [v. State], 580 So.2d 11 (Ala.Crim.App. 1990), aff'd, 580 So.2d 26 (Ala.1991)[,] stated the following regarding prosecutor's statements and arguments: "`"... `[I]t must be examined in its context and in light of what had transpired, that is, in light of preceding argument of defense counsel, to which the prosecutor's argument was an answer.' Washington v. State, 259 Ala. 104 , 65 So.2d 704 (1953); Gibson v. State, 347 So.2d 576 (Ala.Crim.App. 1977); Rutledge v. State, [ 482 So.2d 1250 ] (Ala.Crim.App.1983). | 5 | 1992–2002 |
Craig Newton v. State of Alabama.
green
2 sentences2015Defense counsel had stated: “Life without the possibility of parole will make sure that nothing ever happens at the hands of Mr. Bohannon again ... it will be a deterrent as well.” (R. 1652.) “It is well settled that ‘[a] prosecutor has the right to “reply in kind” to statements made by defense counsel in the defense’s closing argument.’ Newton v. State, [ 78 So.3d 458 , 478] (Ala.Crim.App.2009) (citations and quotations omitted). ‘ “When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it swings wide, and a number of areas barred to prosecutorial comment will suddenly be subject to reply.” ’ 2015Your community." (R. 988.) It is well settled that "[a] prosecutor has the right to 'reply in kind' to statements made by defense counsel in the defense's closing argument." Newton v. State , 78 So.3d 458 , 478 (Ala.Crim.App.2009) (citations and quotations omitted.) "This 'reply-in-kind' doctrine is based on fundamental fairness." Ballard v. State , 767 So.2d 1123 , 1135 (Ala.Crim.App.1999) (citing Ex parte Rutledge , 482 So.2d 1262 , 1264 (Ala.1984) ). " 'When the door is opened by defense counsel's argument, it swings wide, and a number of areas barred to prosecutorial comment will suddenly | 4 | 2013–2015 |
Evans v. State
green
2 sentences2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw 2013Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 3[9] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it swin | 3 | 1990–2014 |
Windham v. State
neutral
2 sentences2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw 2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw | 3 | 1990–2014 |
Moody v. State
green
2 sentences2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw 2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw | 3 | 1990–2014 |
Lane v. State
green
2 sentences2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw 2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw | 3 | 1990–2014 |
Richardson v. State
green
2 sentences2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw 2013Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 3[9] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it swin | 3 | 1990–2014 |
Gills v. State
neutral
2 sentences2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw 2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw | 3 | 1990–2014 |
Gills v. State
neutral
2 sentences2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw 2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw | 3 | 1990–2014 |
Stariha v. Hagood
green
2 sentences2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw 2013Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 3[9] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it swin | 3 | 1990–2014 |
York v. State
green
2 sentences2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw 2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw | 3 | 1990–2014 |
Walker v. State
green
2 sentences2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw 2014Richardson v. State, 354 So.2d 1193 (Ala.Crim.App.1978); Evans v. State, 338 So.2d 1033 (Ala.Crim.App.1976); Lane v. State, 46 Ala.App. 637 , 247 So.2d 679 (1971); Moody v. State, 40 Ala.App. 373 , 113 So.2d 787 (1959); Windham v. State, 35 Ala.App. 547 , 50 So.2d 288 (1950); Gills v. State, 35 Ala. App. 119 , 45 So.2d 44 , cert. denied, 253 Ala. 283 , 45 So.2d 51 (1950); York v. State, 34 Ala.App. 188 , 39 So.2d 694 (1948), cert. denied, 252 Ala. 158 , 34[39] So.2d 697 (1949); Walker v. State, 33 Ala.App. 614 , 36 So.2d 117 (1948). ‘When the door is opened by defense counsel’s argument, it sw | 3 | 1990–2014 |
Grochowski v. Dewitt-Rickards
green
2 sentences2002This court in Stephens v. State, 580 So.2d 11 (Ala.Cr.App.1990), aff'd, 580 So.2d 26 (Ala.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 859 , 112 S.Ct. 176 , 116 L.Ed.2d 138 (1991), stated the following with regard to a prosecutor's statements in arguments: "`" ... `[I]t must be examined in its context and in light of what had transpired, that is, in light of preceding argument of defense counsel, to which the prosecutor's argument was an answer.' Washington v. State, 259 Ala. 104 , 65 So.2d 704 (1953); Gibson v. State, 347 So.2d 576 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); Rutledge v. State, [ 482 So.2d 1250 ] (Ala.Crim.App.1983). 1994This court, in Stephens v. State , 580 So.2d 11 (Ala.Cr.App. 1990), aff'd , 580 So.2d 26 (Ala.), cert. denied , 502 U.S. 859 , 112 S.Ct. 176 , 116 L.Ed.2d 138 (1991), stated the following with regard to a prosecutor's statements in arguments: " ' ". . . '[I]t must be examined in its context and in light of what had transpired, *Page 1209 that is, in light of preceding argument of defense counsel, to which the prosecutor's argument was an answer.' Washington v. State , 259 Ala. 104 , 65 So.2d 704 (1953); Gibson v. State , 347 So.2d 576 (Ala.Crim.App. 1977); Rutledge v. State , 482 So.2d 1250 (A | 3 | 1993–2002 |
Baker v. State
green
2 sentences2010Whitlow v. State, 509 So.2d 252, 256 (Ala.Cr.App.1987); Wysinger v. State, 448 So.2d 435, 438 (Ala.Cr.App.1983); Carpenter v. State, 404 So.2d 89, 97 (Ala.Cr.App.1980), cert. denied, 404 So.2d 100 (Ala.1981). 2007Whitlow v. State, 509 So.2d 252, 256 (Ala.Cr.App.1987); Wysinger v. State, 448 So.2d 435, 438 (Ala.Cr.App.1983); Carpenter v. State, 404 So.2d 89, 97 (Ala.Cr.App.1980), cert. denied, 404 So.2d 100 (Ala.1981). | 2 | 2007–2010 |
Miller v. State
green
2 sentences2007The rule in Alabama is that ‘remarks or comments of the prosecuting attorney, including those which might otherwise be improper, are not grounds for reversal when they are invited, provoked, or occasioned by accused’s counsel and are in reply to or retaliation for his acts and statements.’ Shewbart v. State, 33 Ala. App. 195 , 32 So.2d 241 , cert. denied, 249 Ala. 572 , 32 So.2d 244 (1947); Camper v. State, 384 So.2d 637 (Ala.Crim.App.1980); Wilder v. State, 401 So.2d 151 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 401 So.2d 167 (Ala.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1057 , 102 S.Ct. 606 , 70 L.Ed.2d 595 (1981 2004The rule in Alabama is that `remarks or comments of the prosecuting attorney, including those which might otherwise be improper, are not grounds *425 for reversal when they are invited, provoked, or occasioned by accused's counsel and are in reply to or retaliation for his acts and statements.' Shewbart v. State, 33 Ala.App. 195 , 32 So.2d 241 , cert. denied, 249 Ala. 572 , 32 So.2d 244 (1947); Camper v. State, 384 So.2d 637 (Ala.Crim.App.1980); Wilder v. State, 401 So.2d 151 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 401 So.2d 167 (Ala.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1057 , 102 S.Ct. 606 , 70 L.Ed.2d 595 ( | 2 | 2004–2007 |
| Camper v. State neutral | 2 | 2004–2007 |
Rooks v. United States
green
2 sentences2007The rule in Alabama is that ‘remarks or comments of the prosecuting attorney, including those which might otherwise be improper, are not grounds for reversal when they are invited, provoked, or occasioned by accused’s counsel and are in reply to or retaliation for his acts and statements.’ Shewbart v. State, 33 Ala. App. 195 , 32 So.2d 241 , cert. denied, 249 Ala. 572 , 32 So.2d 244 (1947); Camper v. State, 384 So.2d 637 (Ala.Crim.App.1980); Wilder v. State, 401 So.2d 151 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 401 So.2d 167 (Ala.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1057 , 102 S.Ct. 606 , 70 L.Ed.2d 595 (1981 2004The rule in Alabama is that `remarks or comments of the prosecuting attorney, including those which might otherwise be improper, are not grounds *425 for reversal when they are invited, provoked, or occasioned by accused's counsel and are in reply to or retaliation for his acts and statements.' Shewbart v. State, 33 Ala.App. 195 , 32 So.2d 241 , cert. denied, 249 Ala. 572 , 32 So.2d 244 (1947); Camper v. State, 384 So.2d 637 (Ala.Crim.App.1980); Wilder v. State, 401 So.2d 151 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 401 So.2d 167 (Ala.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1057 , 102 S.Ct. 606 , 70 L.Ed.2d 595 ( | 2 | 2004–2007 |
| Perea v. United States green | 2 | 2004–2007 |
| LePage v. Idaho green | 2 | 2004–2007 |
| Brush v. Rountree neutral | 2 | 2004–2007 |
| Opinion of the Justices neutral | 2 | 2004–2007 |
Shewbart v. State
neutral
2 sentences2007The rule in Alabama is that ‘remarks or comments of the prosecuting attorney, including those which might otherwise be improper, are not grounds for reversal when they are invited, provoked, or occasioned by accused’s counsel and are in reply to or retaliation for his acts and statements.’ Shewbart v. State, 33 Ala. App. 195 , 32 So.2d 241 , cert. denied, 249 Ala. 572 , 32 So.2d 244 (1947); Camper v. State, 384 So.2d 637 (Ala.Crim.App.1980); Wilder v. State, 401 So.2d 151 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 401 So.2d 167 (Ala.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1057 , 102 S.Ct. 606 , 70 L.Ed.2d 595 (1981 2007The rule in Alabama is that ‘remarks or comments of the prosecuting attorney, including those which might otherwise be improper, are not grounds for reversal when they are invited, provoked, or occasioned by accused’s counsel and are in reply to or retaliation for his acts and statements.’ Shewbart v. State, 33 Ala. App. 195 , 32 So.2d 241 , cert. denied, 249 Ala. 572 , 32 So.2d 244 (1947); Camper v. State, 384 So.2d 637 (Ala.Crim.App.1980); Wilder v. State, 401 So.2d 151 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 401 So.2d 167 (Ala.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1057 , 102 S.Ct. 606 , 70 L.Ed.2d 595 (1981 | 2 | 2004–2007 |
| Bozeman v. State green | 2 | 2004–2007 |
| Crane v. State green | 2 | 2004–2007 |
| Sklodowski v. Scott Paper Co. green | 2 | 1994–2002 |
| Ex Parte Rutledge green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Searles v. River Mead Condominium Ass'n green | 1 | 2002–2002 |
| Lopez v. Douglas green | 1 | 2002–2002 |
| Harris v. Prince George's County Public Schools green | 1 | 2002–2002 |
| Ex Parte Chandler green | 1 | 2002–2002 |
| Chandler v. State green | 1 | 2002–2002 |
| Ex Parte George green | 1 | 2002–2002 |
| Williams v. State green | 1 | 1994–1994 |
| McCullough v. State green | 1 | 1990–1990 |
| National Life Accident Ins. Co. v. Davies neutral | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.