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.
9 Alabama opinions name it 1 courts 1984–2007 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 |
|---|---|---|
Brooks v. Stategreen2 sentences2007This Court has found that ‘ “an indirect reference to the defendant’s involvement in other crimes is not incurably harmful to the accused, and any possible prejudice may be eradicated by the trial judge’s prompt curative instruction to the jury.” ’ McDonald v. State, 516 So.2d 868, 871 (Ala.Cr.App.1987) (quoting Brooks v. State, 462 So.2d 758, 760 (Ala.Cr.App.1984)). 1999Dockery v. State, 269 Ala. 564 , 114 So.2d 394 (1959) (in homicide prosecution, evidence that defendant stole witness’s automobile in fleeing scene); Franklin v. State, 357 So.2d 364 (Ala. Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Franklin, 357 So.2d 368 (1978) (in burglary prosecution, evidence that defendant was a “known” burglar was eradicable).’ “Barbee v. State, 395 So.2d 1128, 1134 (Ala.Crim.App.1981). “ ‘[A]ii indirect reference to the defendant’s involvement in other crimes is not incurably harmful to the accused, and any possible prejudice may be eradicated by the trial judge’s prompt curative | 3 | 5 |
McDonald v. Stategreen2 sentences2007This Court has found that ‘ “an indirect reference to the defendant’s involvement in other crimes is not incurably harmful to the accused, and any possible prejudice may be eradicated by the trial judge’s prompt curative instruction to the jury.” ’ McDonald v. State, 516 So.2d 868, 871 (Ala.Cr.App.1987) (quoting Brooks v. State, 462 So.2d 758, 760 (Ala.Cr.App.1984)). 1998This Court has found that "`and indirect reference to the defendant's involvement in other crimes is not incurably harmful to the accused, and any possible prejudice may be eradicated by the trial judge's prompt curative instruction to the jury.'" McDonald v. State , 516 So.2d 868 , 871 (Ala.Cr.App. 1987) (quoting Brooks v. State , 462 So.2d 758 , 760 (Ala.Cr.App. 1984)). | 2 | 3 |
Ex Parte Jeffersongreen2 sentences2000See, e.g., Ex parte Jefferson, 473 So.2d 1110 (Ala.1985). 2000See, e.g., Ex parte Jefferson, 473 So.2d 1110 (Ala.1985). | 2 | 2 |
Barbee v. Stategreen2 sentences1999Dockery v. State, 269 Ala. 564 , 114 So.2d 394 (1959) (in homicide prosecution, evidence that defendant stole witness’s automobile in fleeing scene); Franklin v. State, 357 So.2d 364 (Ala. Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Franklin, 357 So.2d 368 (1978) (in burglary prosecution, evidence that defendant was a “known” burglar was eradicable).’ “Barbee v. State, 395 So.2d 1128, 1134 (Ala.Crim.App.1981). “ ‘[A]ii indirect reference to the defendant’s involvement in other crimes is not incurably harmful to the accused, and any possible prejudice may be eradicated by the trial judge’s prompt curative 1987Dockery v. State , 269 Ala. 564 , 114 So.2d 394 (1959) (in homicide prosecution, evidence that defendant stole witness's automobile in fleeing scene); Franklin v. State , *Page 871 357 So.2d 364 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied Ex parte Franklin , 357 So.2d 368 (1978) (in burglary prosecution, evidence that defendant was a 'known' burglar was eradicable)." Barbee v. State , 395 So.2d 1128 , 1134 (Ala.Crim.App. 1981). "[A]n indirect reference to the defendant's involvement in other crimes is not incurably harmful to the accused, and any possible prejudice may be eradicated by the trial judge's promp | 1 | 2 |
Kendrick v. Stategreen2 sentences1991See also Kendrick v. State , 444 So.2d 905 (Ala.Crim.App. 1984). 1984Reviewing a similar occurrence in Kendrick v. State , 444 So.2d 905 (Ala.Cr.App. 1984), this court noted that an indirect reference to the defendant's involvement in other crimes is not incurably harmful to the accused, and any possible prejudice may be eradicated by the trial judge's prompt curative instruction to the jury. | 1 | 2 |
Dill v. Stategreen1 sentence1999Normally, "`"an indirect reference to the defendant's involvement in other crimes is not incurably harmful to the accused, and any possible prejudice may be eradicated by the trial judge's prompt curative instruction to the jury."'" Dill v. State, 600 So.2d 343, 352 (Ala.Cr.App.1991), aff'd, 600 So.2d 372 (Ala.1992). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Franklin v. State
green
2 sentences1999Dockery v. State, 269 Ala. 564 , 114 So.2d 394 (1959) (in homicide prosecution, evidence that defendant stole witness’s automobile in fleeing scene); Franklin v. State, 357 So.2d 364 (Ala. Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Franklin, 357 So.2d 368 (1978) (in burglary prosecution, evidence that defendant was a “known” burglar was eradicable).’ “Barbee v. State, 395 So.2d 1128, 1134 (Ala.Crim.App.1981). “ ‘[A]ii indirect reference to the defendant’s involvement in other crimes is not incurably harmful to the accused, and any possible prejudice may be eradicated by the trial judge’s prompt curative 1987Dockery v. State , 269 Ala. 564 , 114 So.2d 394 (1959) (in homicide prosecution, evidence that defendant stole witness's automobile in fleeing scene); Franklin v. State , *Page 871 357 So.2d 364 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied Ex parte Franklin , 357 So.2d 368 (1978) (in burglary prosecution, evidence that defendant was a 'known' burglar was eradicable)." Barbee v. State , 395 So.2d 1128 , 1134 (Ala.Crim.App. 1981). "[A]n indirect reference to the defendant's involvement in other crimes is not incurably harmful to the accused, and any possible prejudice may be eradicated by the trial judge's promp | 2 | 1987–1999 |
Waters v. State
green
2 sentences1999Dockery v. State, 269 Ala. 564 , 114 So.2d 394 (1959) (in homicide prosecution, evidence that defendant stole witness’s automobile in fleeing scene); Franklin v. State, 357 So.2d 364 (Ala. Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Franklin, 357 So.2d 368 (1978) (in burglary prosecution, evidence that defendant was a “known” burglar was eradicable).’ “Barbee v. State, 395 So.2d 1128, 1134 (Ala.Crim.App.1981). “ ‘[A]ii indirect reference to the defendant’s involvement in other crimes is not incurably harmful to the accused, and any possible prejudice may be eradicated by the trial judge’s prompt curative 1987Dockery v. State , 269 Ala. 564 , 114 So.2d 394 (1959) (in homicide prosecution, evidence that defendant stole witness's automobile in fleeing scene); Franklin v. State , *Page 871 357 So.2d 364 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied Ex parte Franklin , 357 So.2d 368 (1978) (in burglary prosecution, evidence that defendant was a 'known' burglar was eradicable)." Barbee v. State , 395 So.2d 1128 , 1134 (Ala.Crim.App. 1981). "[A]n indirect reference to the defendant's involvement in other crimes is not incurably harmful to the accused, and any possible prejudice may be eradicated by the trial judge's promp | 2 | 1987–1999 |
Dockery v. State
green
2 sentences1999Dockery v. State, 269 Ala. 564 , 114 So.2d 394 (1959) (in homicide prosecution, evidence that defendant stole witness’s automobile in fleeing scene); Franklin v. State, 357 So.2d 364 (Ala. Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Franklin, 357 So.2d 368 (1978) (in burglary prosecution, evidence that defendant was a “known” burglar was eradicable).’ “Barbee v. State, 395 So.2d 1128, 1134 (Ala.Crim.App.1981). “ ‘[A]ii indirect reference to the defendant’s involvement in other crimes is not incurably harmful to the accused, and any possible prejudice may be eradicated by the trial judge’s prompt curative 1999Dockery v. State, 269 Ala. 564 , 114 So.2d 394 (1959) (in homicide prosecution, evidence that defendant stole witness’s automobile in fleeing scene); Franklin v. State, 357 So.2d 364 (Ala. Cr.App.), cert. denied, Ex parte Franklin, 357 So.2d 368 (1978) (in burglary prosecution, evidence that defendant was a “known” burglar was eradicable).’ “Barbee v. State, 395 So.2d 1128, 1134 (Ala.Crim.App.1981). “ ‘[A]ii indirect reference to the defendant’s involvement in other crimes is not incurably harmful to the accused, and any possible prejudice may be eradicated by the trial judge’s prompt curative | 2 | 1987–1999 |
Ex Parte Dill
green
1 sentence1999Normally, "`"an indirect reference to the defendant's involvement in other crimes is not incurably harmful to the accused, and any possible prejudice may be eradicated by the trial judge's prompt curative instruction to the jury."'" Dill v. State, 600 So.2d 343, 352 (Ala.Cr.App.1991), aff'd, 600 So.2d 372 (Ala.1992). | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Borden v. State
neutral
1 sentence1984Citing the principle approved in Borden v. State , 337 So.2d 1388 (Ala.Cr.App. 1976), the court observed that "when a trial judge sustained an objection and properly instructed the jury to disregard the matter such action was not erroneous unless the matter was of such a nature that it created ineradicable bias or prejudice." Kendrick , 444 So.2d at 909 . | 1 | 1984–1984 |
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.
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.