prejudicial error in Alabama

55 Alabama opinions name it 4 courts 1911–2008 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.

Followed or applied (13)

Case	Followed	Cited
Ex Parte Jonesgreen ala · 1985 · cited in 5 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 1987–1998 2 sentences 1998In Blackmon v. State, 487 So.2d 1022, 1027 (Ala.Cr.App.1986), this Court considered whether the procedural requirements of Rule 15.4(b), Ala.R.Crim.P.(Temp.), the predecessor of the present Rule 13.3, Ala. R.Crim.P., had been satisfied in consolidating the cases of Blackmon and two other defendants for trial. [1] The case was remanded because the record was silent as to the issue "whether the appellant, while represented by counsel, was given an opportunity to be heard on the issue of consolidation at some time before the motion to consolidate was granted." Quoting the 1104 Alabama Supreme Co 1992*As the Alabama Supreme Court stated in Ex parte Jones, 473 So.2d 545 (Ala. 1985), “Affording an opportunity to move for severance after consolidation fails to cure the prejudicial error resulting from violation of the rule.” 473 So.2d at 546 .	2	5
Blackmon v. Stategreen alacrimapp · 1986 · cited in 2 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 1988–1998 2 sentences 1998In Blackmon v. State, 487 So.2d 1022, 1027 (Ala.Cr.App.1986), this Court considered whether the procedural requirements of Rule 15.4(b), Ala.R.Crim.P.(Temp.), the predecessor of the present Rule 13.3, Ala. R.Crim.P., had been satisfied in consolidating the cases of Blackmon and two other defendants for trial. [1] The case was remanded because the record was silent as to the issue "whether the appellant, while represented by counsel, was given an opportunity to be heard on the issue of consolidation at some time before the motion to consolidate was granted." Quoting the 1104 Alabama Supreme Co 1988*If the trial court determines that the defendant is not entitled to a new trial pursuant to the mandate of Batson, supra, we direct the court to "make a finding of fact on the issue of whether the appellant, while represented by counsel, was given an opportunity to be heard on the issue of consolidation at some time before the motion to consolidate was granted, to make a record of such proceeding, and forward it to us." Blackmon v. State, 487 So.2d 1022, 1027 (Ala.Cr.App.1986).	2	2
State v. McCarthygreen moctapp · 1978 · cited in 2 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 1991–1996 2 sentences 1996The court explained in Tomlin: "As the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals stated in United States v. McLain, 823 F.2d 1457 (11th Cir.1987): "`In most occasions, the admission of a co-defendant's guilty plea will substantially affect the defendant's right to a fair trial in that "the jury may regard the issue of the remaining defendant's guilt as settled and that the trial is a mere formality." United States v. Griffin, 778 F.2d 707, 711 (11th Cir.1985).' " McLain, 823 F.2d at 1465 . `The basic rationale underlying the holdings that this is prejudicial error is that it is irrelevant and incompet 1991"The basic rationale underlying the holdings that this is prejudicial error is that it is irrelevant and incompetent because it infers that since the confederate was guilty the defendant must therefore be guilty . . . and violates the defendant's right to be tried on his own." State v. McCarthy , 567 S.W.2d 722 , 724 (Mo.Ct.App. 1978).	1	2
Langford v. Stategreen alacrimapp · 1975 · cited in 2 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 1979–1982 2 sentences 1982Langford v. State , 54 Ala. App. 659 , 312 So.2d 65 (1975); Pitts v. State , 291 Ala. 136 , 279 So.2d 119 (1973). 1982Langford v. State , 54 Ala. App. 659 , 312 So.2d 65 (1975); Pitts v. State , 291 Ala. 136 , 279 So.2d 119 (1973).	1	2
Chrisman v. Brooksgreen ala · 1973 · cited in 1 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 2 sentences 2008See also Hall v. Polk , 363 So.2d 300 , 303 (Ala. 1978) ("Even if the admission of a hearsay statement is technical error, the error is rendered harmless by other evidence to the same effect received without objection."); Chrisman v. Brooks , 291 Ala. 237 , 242 , 279 So.2d 500 , 505 (1973) ("Prejudicial error may not be predicated upon admission of evidence which has been admitted without objection or motion to exclude at some other stage of the trial."). 2008See also Hall v. Polk , 363 So.2d 300 , 303 (Ala. 1978) ("Even if the admission of a hearsay statement is technical error, the error is rendered harmless by other evidence to the same effect received without objection."); Chrisman v. Brooks , 291 Ala. 237 , 242 , 279 So.2d 500 , 505 (1973) ("Prejudicial error may not be predicated upon admission of evidence which has been admitted without objection or motion to exclude at some other stage of the trial.").	1	1
Hall v. Polkgreen ala · 1978 · cited in 1 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008See also Hall v. Polk , 363 So.2d 300 , 303 (Ala. 1978) ("Even if the admission of a hearsay statement is technical error, the error is rendered harmless by other evidence to the same effect received without objection."); Chrisman v. Brooks , 291 Ala. 237 , 242 , 279 So.2d 500 , 505 (1973) ("Prejudicial error may not be predicated upon admission of evidence which has been admitted without objection or motion to exclude at some other stage of the trial.").	1	1
Ex Parte Hutchersongreen ala · 1996 · cited in 1 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006 2 sentences 2006In Ex parte Hutcherson , 677 So.2d 1205 , 1209 (Ala. 1996), this Court held that the improper admission of "both `DNA matching' evidence and DNA population frequency statistics" created a prejudicial error that did result in substantial injury. 2006In Ex parte Hutcherson, 677 So.2d 1205, 1209 (Ala.1996), this Court held that the improper admission of "both `DNA matching' evidence and DNA population frequency statistics" created a prejudicial error that did result in substantial injury.	1	1
Holladay v. Stategreen alacrimapp · 1989 · cited in 1 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 1998–1998 1 sentence 1998In Blackmon v. State, 487 So.2d 1022, 1027 (Ala.Cr.App.1986), this Court considered whether the procedural requirements of Rule 15.4(b), Ala.R.Crim.P.(Temp.), the predecessor of the present Rule 13.3, Ala. R.Crim.P., had been satisfied in consolidating the cases of Blackmon and two other defendants for trial. [1] The case was remanded because the record was silent as to the issue "whether the appellant, while represented by counsel, was given an opportunity to be heard on the issue of consolidation at some time before the motion to consolidate was granted." Quoting the *1104 Alabama Supreme Co	1	1
Smitherman v. Beaversgreen ala · 1993 · cited in 1 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997 2 sentences 1997See Smitherman , supra, wherein this Court found prejudicial error when the jury was charged on the sudden emergency doctrine after a requested instruction on that doctrine had been refused and after neither party's attorney had mentioned the doctrine in his closing argument. 1997See Smitherman, supra, wherein this Court found prejudicial error when the jury was charged on the sudden emergency doctrine after a requested instruction on that doctrine had been refused and after neither party's attorney had mentioned the doctrine in his closing argument.	1	1
United States v. James W. Griffin, A/K/A J.W. Griffingreen ca11 · 1985 · cited in 1 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 1996–1996 1 sentence 1996The court explained in Tomlin: "As the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals stated in United States v. McLain, 823 F.2d 1457 (11th Cir.1987): "`In most occasions, the admission of a co-defendant's guilty plea will substantially affect the defendant's right to a fair trial in that "the jury may regard the issue of the remaining defendant's guilt as settled and that the trial is a mere formality." United States v. Griffin, 778 F.2d 707, 711 (11th Cir.1985).' " McLain, 823 F.2d at 1465 . `The basic rationale underlying the holdings that this is prejudicial error is that it is irrelevant and incompet	1	1
Smiley v. Stategreen alacrimapp · 1983 · cited in 1 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 1988–1988 1 sentence 1988Smiley v. State, 435 So.2d 202, 206 (Ala.Crim.App.1983).	1	1
Moon v. Nolengreen · 1975 · cited in 1 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 1978–1978	1	1
People v. Bandhauergreen cal · 1967 · cited in 1 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 1969–1969	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (67)

Case	Cited	Years
HARVEY REGLAND COMPANY v. Newton neutral ala · 1958 2 sentences 1986"Prejudicial error may not be predicated upon the admission of evidence which has been admitted without objection or motion to exclude at some other stage of the trial." Harvey Ragland Co. v. Newton , 268 Ala. 192 , 196 , 105 So.2d 110 , 112 (1958) (citations omitted); Starr v. Starr , 293 Ala. 204 , 301 So.2d 78 (1974); Bankers Fire Marine Ins. 1986"Prejudicial error may not be predicated upon the admission of evidence which has been admitted without objection or motion to exclude at some other stage of the trial." Harvey Ragland Co. v. Newton , 268 Ala. 192 , 196 , 105 So.2d 110 , 112 (1958) (citations omitted); Starr v. Starr , 293 Ala. 204 , 301 So.2d 78 (1974); Bankers Fire Marine Ins.	5	1965–1986
Lawrence v. State green alacrimapp · 1982 2 sentences 2008Lawrence v. State, 409 So.2d 987 (Ala.Crim. 2007Lawrence v. State, 409 So.2d 987 (Ala.Crim.	4	1986–2008
Ex Parte Ware green ala · 1982 2 sentences 1992Lawrence v. State , 409 So.2d 987 (Ala.Crim.App. 1982); Ware v. State , 409 So.2d 886 (Ala.Crim.App. 1981), cert. quashed, Ex parte Ware , 409 So.2d 893 (Ala. 1982); Chambers v. State , 400 So.2d 436 (Ala.Crim.App. 1981). 1986The admission of incompetent evidence is harmless error where the fact to which such evidence relates is otherwise established by competent evidence." Lawrence v. State , 409 So.2d 987 , 989 (Ala.Cr.App. 1982) (citations omitted). "[T]he erroneous admission of evidence is not ground for reversal, if the same evidence has already been admitted to the jury without objection." Ware v. State , 409 So.2d 886 , 893 (Ala.Cr.App. 1981), cert. quashed, 409 So.2d 893 (Ala. 1982).	2	1986–1992
Ware v. State green alacrimapp · 1981 2 sentences 1992Lawrence v. State , 409 So.2d 987 (Ala.Crim.App. 1982); Ware v. State , 409 So.2d 886 (Ala.Crim.App. 1981), cert. quashed, Ex parte Ware , 409 So.2d 893 (Ala. 1982); Chambers v. State , 400 So.2d 436 (Ala.Crim.App. 1981). 1986The admission of incompetent evidence is harmless error where the fact to which such evidence relates is otherwise established by competent evidence." Lawrence v. State , 409 So.2d 987 , 989 (Ala.Cr.App. 1982) (citations omitted). "[T]he erroneous admission of evidence is not ground for reversal, if the same evidence has already been admitted to the jury without objection." Ware v. State , 409 So.2d 886 , 893 (Ala.Cr.App. 1981), cert. quashed, 409 So.2d 893 (Ala. 1982).	2	1986–1992
Turner v. Blanton green ala · 1965 2 sentences 1977Prejudicial error may not be predicated upon the admission of evidence which has been admitted without objection or motion to exclude at some other stage of the trial." Turner v. Blanton , 277 Ala. 536 , 541 , 173 So.2d 80 , 84 (1965), overruled on other grounds Lonnie Russell Ford, Inc. v. Mitchell , 279 Ala. 340 , 185 So.2d 132 (1966). 1977Prejudicial error may not be predicated upon the admission of evidence which has been admitted without objection or motion to exclude at some other stage of the trial." Turner v. Blanton , 277 Ala. 536 , 541 , 173 So.2d 80 , 84 (1965), overruled on other grounds Lonnie Russell Ford, Inc. v. Mitchell , 279 Ala. 340 , 185 So.2d 132 (1966).	2	1973–1977
Williams v. Roche Undertaking Co. green ala · 1950 2 sentences 1975For other cases in accord with our holding see Williams v. Roche Undertaking Co., 255 Ala. 56 , 49 So.2d 902 ; Huguley v. State, 39 Ala.App. 104 , 96 So.2d 315 ; McDonald v. Amason, 39 Ala.App. 492 , 104 So.2d 716 . 1975For other cases in accord with our holding see Williams v. Roche Undertaking Co., 255 Ala. 56 , 49 So.2d 902 ; Huguley v. State, 39 Ala.App. 104 , 96 So.2d 315 ; McDonald v. Amason, 39 Ala.App. 492 , 104 So.2d 716 .	2	1962–1975
Huguley v. State green alactapp · 1957 2 sentences 1975For other cases in accord with our holding see Williams v. Roche Undertaking Co., 255 Ala. 56 , 49 So.2d 902 ; Huguley v. State, 39 Ala.App. 104 , 96 So.2d 315 ; McDonald v. Amason, 39 Ala.App. 492 , 104 So.2d 716 . 1975For other cases in accord with our holding see Williams v. Roche Undertaking Co., 255 Ala. 56 , 49 So.2d 902 ; Huguley v. State, 39 Ala.App. 104 , 96 So.2d 315 ; McDonald v. Amason, 39 Ala.App. 492 , 104 So.2d 716 .	2	1962–1975
McDonald v. Amason green alactapp · 1958 2 sentences 1975For other cases in accord with our holding see Williams v. Roche Undertaking Co., 255 Ala. 56 , 49 So.2d 902 ; Huguley v. State, 39 Ala.App. 104 , 96 So.2d 315 ; McDonald v. Amason, 39 Ala.App. 492 , 104 So.2d 716 . 1975For other cases in accord with our holding see Williams v. Roche Undertaking Co., 255 Ala. 56 , 49 So.2d 902 ; Huguley v. State, 39 Ala.App. 104 , 96 So.2d 315 ; McDonald v. Amason, 39 Ala.App. 492 , 104 So.2d 716 .	2	1962–1975
Strickland v. Washington green scotus · 1984 1 sentence 2000Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668 (1984), does, indeed, predicate relief for ineffective assistance of counsel on proof of both substandard performance by the trial counsel and substantial prejudice resulting to the defendant from the substandard performance.	1	2000–2000
Oglesby v. State neutral ala · 1976 1 sentence 1998In Oglesby v. State , 337 So.2d 381 , 384-85 (Ala. 1976), the Alabama Supreme Court concluded that the trial court had erred in not requiring the State to elect between the two perjury counts in the indictment and held, based upon this prejudicial error, that the appellant was entitled to a new trial.	1	1998–1998
Goodman v. State neutral alacrimapp · 1992 1 sentence 1998In Blackmon v. State, 487 So.2d 1022, 1027 (Ala.Cr.App.1986), this Court considered whether the procedural requirements of Rule 15.4(b), Ala.R.Crim.P.(Temp.), the predecessor of the present Rule 13.3, Ala. R.Crim.P., had been satisfied in consolidating the cases of Blackmon and two other defendants for trial. [1] The case was remanded because the record was silent as to the issue "whether the appellant, while represented by counsel, was given an opportunity to be heard on the issue of consolidation at some time before the motion to consolidate was granted." Quoting the *1104 Alabama Supreme Co	1	1998–1998
Tomlin v. State green alacrimapp · 1991 1 sentence 1996An accused is `entitled to have the question of his guilt determined upon the evidence against him, not on whether a codefendant or government witness has been convicted of the same charge.' [United States v. ]Miranda, 593 F.2d [590,] 594 [(5th Cir.1979) ]." 591 So.2d at 555 .	1	1996–1996
United States v. Dennis McLain A/K/A \Del Brenner green · 1987 2 sentences 1996The court explained in Tomlin: "As the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals stated in United States v. McLain, 823 F.2d 1457 (11th Cir.1987): "`In most occasions, the admission of a co-defendant's guilty plea will substantially affect the defendant's right to a fair trial in that "the jury may regard the issue of the remaining defendant's guilt as settled and that the trial is a mere formality." United States v. Griffin, 778 F.2d 707, 711 (11th Cir.1985).' " McLain, 823 F.2d at 1465 . `The basic rationale underlying the holdings that this is prejudicial error is that it is irrelevant and incompet 1996The court explained in Tomlin: "As the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals stated in United States v. McLain, 823 F.2d 1457 (11th Cir.1987): "`In most occasions, the admission of a co-defendant's guilty plea will substantially affect the defendant's right to a fair trial in that "the jury may regard the issue of the remaining defendant's guilt as settled and that the trial is a mere formality." United States v. Griffin, 778 F.2d 707, 711 (11th Cir.1985).' " McLain, 823 F.2d at 1465 . `The basic rationale underlying the holdings that this is prejudicial error is that it is irrelevant and incompet	1	1996–1996
Chambers v. State neutral alacrimapp · 1981 1 sentence 1992Lawrence v. State , 409 So.2d 987 (Ala.Crim.App. 1982); Ware v. State , 409 So.2d 886 (Ala.Crim.App. 1981), cert. quashed, Ex parte Ware , 409 So.2d 893 (Ala. 1982); Chambers v. State , 400 So.2d 436 (Ala.Crim.App. 1981).	1	1992–1992
United States v. Fernando Miranda green ca5 · 1979 1 sentence 1991An accused is "entitled to have the question of his guilt determined upon the evidence against him, not on whether a codefendant or government witness has been convicted of the same charge." Miranda , 593 F.2d at 594 .	1	1991–1991
Norsworthy v. State green alacrimapp · 1989 2 sentences 1991Norsworthy v. State , 542 So.2d 950 (Ala.Cr.App. 1989). 1991Norsworthy v. State, 542 So.2d 950 (Ala.Cr.App.1989).	1	1991–1991
Ex Parte Davis green ala · 1989 1 sentence 1990In this case, the petitioner’s defense at trial was an alibi: that he was not at the scene of the crime and that someone else must have robbed, sodomized, and murdered the victim. [[Image here]] “We find a compelling distinction between the facts of those cases cited by petitioner and the facts and issues of this case; therefore, we hold that the trial court did not commit error injurious to the petitioner’s substantial rights by allowing Dr. Embry to testify as to the relative positions of the parties.” Davis, 554 So.2d at 1114-1115 .	1	1990–1990
Bates v. State neutral alacrimapp · 1986 1 sentence 1988Bates v. State , 484 So.2d 1206 , 1208 (Ala.Cr.App. 1986).	1	1988–1988
Bridges v. State neutral alacrimapp · 1986 1 sentence 1987Clark which found that the trial court committed prejudicial error by overruling the appellant's motion for continuance, 487 So.2d 1012 .	1	1987–1987
Bankers Fire & Marine Insurance v. Contractors Equipment Rental Co. green ala · 1963	1	1986–1986
Starr v. Starr green ala · 1974	1	1986–1986
McCray v. Illinois green scotus · 1967	1	1986–1986
Kendrick v. State neutral alactapp · 1921	1	1984–1984
Smith v. Vaughn green ala · 1921	1	1984–1984
Ex Parte Watts green ala · 1923	1	1984–1984
Stewart v. State green alactapp · 1921	1	1984–1984
Gilbert v. State neutral alactapp · 1923	1	1984–1984
Pitts v. State green ala · 1973	1	1982–1982
Alabama Great Southern Railroad Co. v. Morrison green ala · 1967	1	1982–1982
Thompson v. State green alacrimapp · 1974	1	1979–1979
Coleman v. Alabama green scotus · 1964	1	1978–1978
Bennett v. State neutral ala · 1909	1	1977–1977
B'ham Ry. L. & P. Co. v. Glenn green ala · 1912	1	1977–1977
Reynolds v. State neutral ala · 1916	1	1977–1977
Burton v. State neutral · 1896	1	1977–1977
Lonnie Russell Ford, Inc. v. Mitchell green ala · 1966	1	1977–1977
Local 204 of Textile Workers Union of A. v. Richardson green ala · 1943	1	1977–1977
Randolph v. State neutral ala · 1976	1	1977–1977
Randolph v. State green alacrimapp · 1976	1	1977–1977
Williams v. State neutral alacrimapp · 1974	1	1976–1976

Where else courts name it

CA 871 (1882–2026) OH 607 (1928–2026) NC 216 (1940–2026) IL 173 (1899–2026) LA 157 (1927–2025) MO 134 (1889–2025) WA 129 (1908–2026) SD 123 (1913–2026) MA 94 (1961–2026) FL 83 (1933–2026) WY 61 (1965–2025) NE 60 (1899–2021) NY 56 (1916–2024) AL 55 (1911–2008) OK 54 (1915–2021) ID 46 (1887–2025) KY 45 (1912–2022) CO 43 (1905–2026) AR 39 (1897–2025) PA 39 (1936–2026) MN 35 (1903–2024) UT 34 (1938–2026) MD 32 (1927–2026) IA 31 (1887–2026) TN 29 (1932–2026) WI 28 (1904–2004) ME 27 (1980–2025) MI 27 (1897–2021) OR 25 (1923–2026) TX 25 (1916–2026) NJ 23 (1952–2025) VA 22 (1934–2024) KS 21 (1894–2017) AZ 19 (1945–2026) WV 17 (1921–2017) SC 16 (1936–2025) MT 16 (1899–2017) DC 16 (1977–2012) MS 14 (1926–2014) GA 13 (1954–2003) NV 13 (1954–2017) VT 10 (1917–1988) NM 9 (1972–2024) IN 9 (1891–2018) ND 8 (1904–2013) DE 6 (1979–2020) PR 6 (1910–1968) CT 5 (1964–1999) AK 5 (1975–2021) RI 3 (1973–2015) HI 3 (1987–2022) NH 2 (1986–1999)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check