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.
16 Alabama opinions name it 3 courts 1958–2001 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Showers v. Stategreen1 sentence1991Under Alabama law, “a trial judge may urge a jury to resume deliberations and cultivate a spirit of harmony so as to reach a verdict, as long as the court does not suggest which way the verdict should be returned and no duress or coercion is used.” Showers v. State, 407 So.2d 169, 171 (Ala.1981). | 1 | 1 |
Weaver v. Stategreen1 sentence1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1 |
Rogers v. Stategreen2 sentences1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) 1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1 |
Kirkland v. Stategreen1 sentence1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1 |
Ex Parte Kirklandgreen1 sentence1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1 |
Watson v. Stategreen2 sentences1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) 1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1 |
Liner v. Stategreen1 sentence1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1 |
Ex Parte Jonesgreen1 sentence1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1 |
Jones v. Stategreen1 sentence1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1 |
Crampton v. Graygreen1 sentence1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1 |
Potter v. Stategreen1 sentence1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1 |
| Thomas v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
Walker v. Stategreen1 sentence1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1 |
| Reed v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
Ex Parte Thomasgreen2 sentences1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) 1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1 |
Fryer v. Stategreen1 sentence1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1 |
| Reed v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
Beard v. Stategreen2 sentences1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) 1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1 |
| Quinn v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Williams v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Callowaygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady
green
2 sentences1981In Complete Auto the Court overruled the rule in Spector Motor Service “that a state tax on the ‘privilege of doing business’ is per se unconstitutional when . .. applied to interstate commerce,” 430 U.S. at 289 , 97 S.Ct. at 1084 , and held that a state could impose an apportioned tax upon the gross receipts derived from a segment of interstate commerce conducted entirely within the taxing state. 5 In Washington Department of Revenue the Court overruled Puget Sound and held that a state tax is not necessarily invalid because it is imposed directly on the privilege of conducting interstate bus 1981In Complete Auto the Court overruled the rule in Spector Motor Service “that a state tax on the ‘privilege of doing business’ is per se unconstitutional when . .. applied to interstate commerce,” 430 U.S. at 289 , 97 S.Ct. at 1084 , and held that a state could impose an apportioned tax upon the gross receipts derived from a segment of interstate commerce conducted entirely within the taxing state. 5 In Washington Department of Revenue the Court overruled Puget Sound and held that a state tax is not necessarily invalid because it is imposed directly on the privilege of conducting interstate bus | 2 | 1981–1981 |
Bighames v. State
green
1 sentence2001The court, in discussing this ruling, quoted the following from Bighames, 440 So.2d at 1235 : "`The general rule is that the identification expert must have personal knowledge of the person whose fingerprints are on the fingerprint card before that witness can testify that the card bears the fingerprints of a specific individual. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Schneider National Carriers, Inc. v. Tinney
green
2 sentences2000Recently, on May 26, 2000, this court overruled that requirement of Brown v. Whitaker Contracting, supra , in Schneider National Carriers, Inc. v. Tinney, 776 So.2d 753 (Ala.2000). 2000Recently, on May 26, 2000, this court overruled that requirement of Brown v. Whitaker Contracting , supra , in Schneider National Carriers, Inc. v. Tinney , 776 So.2d 753 (Ala. 2000). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Brown v. Whitaker Contracting Corp.
green
2 sentences2000Recently, on May 26, 2000, this court overruled that requirement of Brown v. Whitaker Contracting, supra , in Schneider National Carriers, Inc. v. Tinney, 776 So.2d 753 (Ala.2000). 2000Recently, on May 26, 2000, this court overruled that requirement of Brown v. Whitaker Contracting , supra , in Schneider National Carriers, Inc. v. Tinney , 776 So.2d 753 (Ala. 2000). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Ex Parte Thomas
green
2 sentences1993There was no evidence that the robbery was "gang-related." In Ex parte Thomas , [1993] 625 So.2d 1156 (Ala. 1993), the Alabama Supreme Court held that in a prosecution for a murder resulting from a "drive-by shooting," reversible error occurred when the prosecutor deliberately elicited irrelevant and highly prejudicial testimony concerning the defendant's gang membership, and the trial court overruled defense counsel's objection — in spite of the fact that defense counsel refused the trial court's offer of curative instructions. 1993In that case, the Court noted that where testimony of a defendant's gang membership is irrelevant, it is "highly prejudicial" and inadmissible: "In light of the massive media coverage of gang violence in contemporary society, the assertion that a defendant's membership in a gang called the 'Vice Lords' will not prejudice him in the eyes of the jury is simply untenable." 625 So.2d at 1157 . | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Ex Parte Pate
green
1 sentence1992Where a prosecution witness has testified on direct examination, the defendant, "upon laying a proper predicate, is entitled to have the [trial c]ourt, at least, conduct an in camera inspection," for the purpose of determining "whether the statement made by the witness before trial differed in any respects from statements made to the jury during the trial," and "whether the statement requested was of such a nature that without it the defendant's trial would be fundamentally unfair." Ex parte Pate , 415 So.2d 1140 , 1144 (Ala. 1981) (emphasis omitted). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Boggan v. State
green
1 sentence1987"This court has held on many occasions that in order to determine whether the above statement of the prosecutor was improper, 'it 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.' [Citations omitted.] The rule in Alabama is that remarks or comments of the prosecuting attorney, including those which might or would 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 | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Ware v. State
neutral
1 sentence1985In a supplemental letter brief, the appellant has directed this court's attention to the recent case of Ware v. State , 472 So.2d 447 (Ala.Cr.App. 1985). | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Nichols v. State
green
2 sentences1984"Where insanity is relied upon as a defense every act of the accused's life *Page 230 which throws some light on such issue is relevant thereto." Nichols v. State , 276 Ala. 209 , 211 , 160 So.2d 619 , 621 (1964). 1984"Where insanity is relied upon as a defense every act of the accused's life *Page 230 which throws some light on such issue is relevant thereto." Nichols v. State , 276 Ala. 209 , 211 , 160 So.2d 619 , 621 (1964). | 1 | 1984–1984 |
| Wright v. State green | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Cassady v. State
neutral
2 sentences1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) 1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Donald Joseph Hall v. United States
green
1 sentence1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Jeter v. State
neutral
1 sentence1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Oury v. State
green
2 sentences1981In the present case, the trial court overruled the defense objection to admitting the marijuana on the basis of Oury v. State, 53 Ala.App. 240 , 298 So.2d 661 (1974), and on the testimony of Adair that he received the exhibit in a sealed condition. 1981In the present case, the trial court overruled the defense objection to admitting the marijuana on the basis of Oury v. State, 53 Ala.App. 240 , 298 So.2d 661 (1974), and on the testimony of Adair that he received the exhibit in a sealed condition. | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Ferguson v. State
green
2 sentences1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) 1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Jeter v. State
neutral
1 sentence1981Hall v. United States , 419 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1969) ("hoodlum"); Wright v. State , 279 Ala. 543 , 188 So.2d 272 (1966) ("Judas"); Rogers v. State , 275 Ala. 588 , 157 So.2d 13 (1963) ("a slick and slimy crow"); Watson v. State , 266 Ala. 41 , 93 So.2d 750 (1957) ("a maniac"); Weaver v. State , 142 Ala. 33 , 39 So. 341 (1905) ("beast"); Liner v. State , 350 So.2d 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1977) ("a rattlesnake" and "a viper"); Jones v. State , 348 So.2d 1116 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Jones , 348 So.2d 1120 (Ala. 1977) ("a purveyor of drugs"); Kirkland v. State , 340 So.2d 1139 (Ala.Cr.App.) | 1 | 1981–1981 |
| Littleton v. State neutral | 1 | 1978–1978 |
| Hussey v. State green | 1 | 1960–1960 |
| Ezzell v. State green | 1 | 1958–1958 |
| Stoudemire v. Davis neutral | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.