9 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1949–2012 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 |
|---|---|---|
Edwards v. Stategreen2 sentences2012Cf. Edwards v. Indiana, 412 N.E.2d 223, 225-26 (Ind.1980) (where defendant, not yet a suspect, was given orally his Miranda warnings and record contained no evidence of content of oral advisement, confession given 5 hours later when defendant had become a suspect not admissible). 2010Cf. Edwards v. Indiana, 412 N.E.2d 223, 225-26 (Ind.1980) (where defendant, not yet a suspect, was given orally his Miranda warnings and record contained no evidence of content of oral advisement, confession given 5 hours later when defendant had become a suspect not admissible). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Smith v. State
green
1 sentence1991As Judge Tyson recently stated in Smith v. State , 590 So.2d 388 (Ala.Cr.App. 1991): "Neither Batson nor Branch [ v. State , 526 So.2d 609 (Ala. 1987)] mandates that a defendant be given the opportunity to cross-examine jurors or other witnesses in order to establish that the State's reasons are based on sham or pretext. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Ex Parte Branch
green
1 sentence1991As Judge Tyson recently stated in Smith v. State , 590 So.2d 388 (Ala.Cr.App. 1991): "Neither Batson nor Branch [ v. State , 526 So.2d 609 (Ala. 1987)] mandates that a defendant be given the opportunity to cross-examine jurors or other witnesses in order to establish that the State's reasons are based on sham or pretext. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Ex Parte Womack
green
1 sentence1991"Because of the diverse methodologies employed by defense counsel and the broad range of opinion about how to best address a particular situation, the burden is upon the defendant to overcome the presumption that the challenged action constitutes 'sound trial strategy.' " Ex parte Womack , 541 So.2d 47 , 66 (Ala. 1988). | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Davis v. Wingard
neutral
2 sentences1978Davis v. Wingard, 269 Ala. 535 , 114 So.2d 450 .” A careful search of the record reflects no error injuriously affecting the substantial rights of the appellant. 1978Davis v. Wingard, 269 Ala. 535 , 114 So.2d 450 .” A careful search of the record reflects no error injuriously affecting the substantial rights of the appellant. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Young v. State
green
1 sentence1978Lee v. State , Ala.Cr.App., 346 So.2d 31 ; Young v. State , Ala.Cr.App., 346 So.2d 509 . *Page 303 A careful search of the record reflects no error injuriously affecting the substantial rights of appellant. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
United States v. Glenn W. Hall
green
1 sentence1978United States v. Hall, 2 Cir., 421 F.2d 540 .” A careful search of the record reflects no error injuriously affecting the substantial rights of appellant. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Ex parte Rogers
neutral
1 sentence1978Lee v. State , Ala.Cr.App., 346 So.2d 31 ; Young v. State , Ala.Cr.App., 346 So.2d 509 . *Page 303 A careful search of the record reflects no error injuriously affecting the substantial rights of appellant. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Valenzuela v. Sellers
green
2 sentences1972The withdrawal of such an amendment was within the discretion of the trial court.....” Valenzuela v. Sellers, 253 Ala. 142, 145 , 43 So.2d 121, 123 . ,[1] ■ Reversible error is not shown here. 1972The withdrawal of such an amendment was within the discretion of the trial court.....” Valenzuela v. Sellers, 253 Ala. 142, 145 , 43 So.2d 121, 123 . ,[1] ■ Reversible error is not shown here. | 1 | 1972–1972 |
Southern Hardware & Supply Co. v. Block Bros.
green
2 sentences1949The withdrawal of such an amendment was within the discretion of the trial court, Southern Hardware Supply Co. v. Block Bros., 163 Ala. 81 , 82 , 50 So. 1036 ; Deholl v. Pim, 219 Ala. 372 , 373 , 122 So. 320 ; 41 Am. 1949The withdrawal of such an amendment was within the discretion of the trial court, Southern Hardware Supply Co. v. Block Bros., 163 Ala. 81 , 82 , 50 So. 1036 ; Deholl v. Pim, 219 Ala. 372 , 373 , 122 So. 320 ; 41 Am. | 1 | 1949–1949 |
Deholl v. Pim
neutral
2 sentences1949The withdrawal of such an amendment was within the discretion of the trial court, Southern Hardware Supply Co. v. Block Bros., 163 Ala. 81 , 82 , 50 So. 1036 ; Deholl v. Pim, 219 Ala. 372 , 373 , 122 So. 320 ; 41 Am. 1949The withdrawal of such an amendment was within the discretion of the trial court, Southern Hardware Supply Co. v. Block Bros., 163 Ala. 81 , 82 , 50 So. 1036 ; Deholl v. Pim, 219 Ala. 372 , 373 , 122 So. 320 ; 41 Am. | 1 | 1949–1949 |
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.