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.
6 Alabama opinions name it 1 courts 1981–2001 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 |
|---|---|---|
Davis v. Stategreen2 sentences2001However, the ... comments made by the prosecutor in his rebuttal replies to the comments made by defense counsel in his closing argument. `When the door is opened by defense counsel's argument, it swings wide, and a number of areas barred to prosecutorial comment would suddenly be subject to reply.' Davis v. State, 494 So.2d 851, 855 (Ala.Cr.App. 1986). 1994In Chatom v. State , 619 So.2d 222 , 224-25 (Ala.Cr.App. 1993), this court held: " '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.Cr.App. 1986). | 1 | 4 |
Jones v. Stategreen2 sentences1981Even if we hold the comments made by defense counsel during the hearing of the motion for new trial sufficient to have properly and timely raised this issue in the trial court, Jones v. State , 373 So.2d 1221 , 1225 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 373 So.2d 1225 (Ala. 1979), the defendant's conviction is still due to be affirmed on this ground. "(C)riminal liability for receiving or concealing stolen property may attach where one was present but did not participate in the actual taking and carrying away of the property." Thomas v. State , 389 So.2d 552 , 554 (Ala.Cr.App. 1980); White v. State , 3 1981Even if we hold the comments made by defense counsel during the hearing of the motion for new trial sufficient to have properly and timely raised this issue in the trial court, Jones v. State, 373 So.2d 1221, 1225 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 373 So.2d 1225 (Ala.1979), the defendant’s conviction is still due to be affirmed on this ground. “(Criminal liability for receiving or concealing stolen property may attach where one was present but did not participate in the actual taking and carrying away of the property.” Thomas v. State, 389 So.2d 552, 554 (Ala.Cr.App.1980); White v. State, 383 So.2d | 1 | 2 |
Thomas v. Stategreen2 sentences1981Even if we hold the comments made by defense counsel during the hearing of the motion for new trial sufficient to have properly and timely raised this issue in the trial court, Jones v. State , 373 So.2d 1221 , 1225 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 373 So.2d 1225 (Ala. 1979), the defendant's conviction is still due to be affirmed on this ground. "(C)riminal liability for receiving or concealing stolen property may attach where one was present but did not participate in the actual taking and carrying away of the property." Thomas v. State , 389 So.2d 552 , 554 (Ala.Cr.App. 1980); White v. State , 3 1981Even if we hold the comments made by defense counsel during the hearing of the motion for new trial sufficient to have properly and timely raised this issue in the trial court, Jones v. State, 373 So.2d 1221, 1225 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 373 So.2d 1225 (Ala.1979), the defendant’s conviction is still due to be affirmed on this ground. “(Criminal liability for receiving or concealing stolen property may attach where one was present but did not participate in the actual taking and carrying away of the property.” Thomas v. State, 389 So.2d 552, 554 (Ala.Cr.App.1980); White v. State, 383 So.2d | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Graham v. State
green
2 sentences1981Even if we hold the comments made by defense counsel during the hearing of the motion for new trial sufficient to have properly and timely raised this issue in the trial court, Jones v. State , 373 So.2d 1221 , 1225 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 373 So.2d 1225 (Ala. 1979), the defendant's conviction is still due to be affirmed on this ground. "(C)riminal liability for receiving or concealing stolen property may attach where one was present but did not participate in the actual taking and carrying away of the property." Thomas v. State , 389 So.2d 552 , 554 (Ala.Cr.App. 1980); White v. State , 3 1981Even if we hold the comments made by defense counsel during the hearing of the motion for new trial sufficient to have properly and timely raised this issue in the trial court, Jones v. State, 373 So.2d 1221, 1225 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 373 So.2d 1225 (Ala.1979), the defendant’s conviction is still due to be affirmed on this ground. “(Criminal liability for receiving or concealing stolen property may attach where one was present but did not participate in the actual taking and carrying away of the property.” Thomas v. State, 389 So.2d 552, 554 (Ala.Cr.App.1980); White v. State, 383 So.2d | 2 | 1981–1981 |
Ex Parte Price
green
2 sentences1981Even if we hold the comments made by defense counsel during the hearing of the motion for new trial sufficient to have properly and timely raised this issue in the trial court, Jones v. State , 373 So.2d 1221 , 1225 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 373 So.2d 1225 (Ala. 1979), the defendant's conviction is still due to be affirmed on this ground. "(C)riminal liability for receiving or concealing stolen property may attach where one was present but did not participate in the actual taking and carrying away of the property." Thomas v. State , 389 So.2d 552 , 554 (Ala.Cr.App. 1980); White v. State , 3 1981Even if we hold the comments made by defense counsel during the hearing of the motion for new trial sufficient to have properly and timely raised this issue in the trial court, Jones v. State, 373 So.2d 1221, 1225 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 373 So.2d 1225 (Ala.1979), the defendant’s conviction is still due to be affirmed on this ground. “(Criminal liability for receiving or concealing stolen property may attach where one was present but did not participate in the actual taking and carrying away of the property.” Thomas v. State, 389 So.2d 552, 554 (Ala.Cr.App.1980); White v. State, 383 So.2d | 2 | 1981–1981 |
Mefford v. State
green
2 sentences1981Even if we hold the comments made by defense counsel during the hearing of the motion for new trial sufficient to have properly and timely raised this issue in the trial court, Jones v. State , 373 So.2d 1221 , 1225 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 373 So.2d 1225 (Ala. 1979), the defendant's conviction is still due to be affirmed on this ground. "(C)riminal liability for receiving or concealing stolen property may attach where one was present but did not participate in the actual taking and carrying away of the property." Thomas v. State , 389 So.2d 552 , 554 (Ala.Cr.App. 1980); White v. State , 3 1981Even if we hold the comments made by defense counsel during the hearing of the motion for new trial sufficient to have properly and timely raised this issue in the trial court, Jones v. State, 373 So.2d 1221, 1225 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 373 So.2d 1225 (Ala.1979), the defendant’s conviction is still due to be affirmed on this ground. “(Criminal liability for receiving or concealing stolen property may attach where one was present but did not participate in the actual taking and carrying away of the property.” Thomas v. State, 389 So.2d 552, 554 (Ala.Cr.App.1980); White v. State, 383 So.2d | 2 | 1981–1981 |
Ex Parte Jones
green
2 sentences1981Even if we hold the comments made by defense counsel during the hearing of the motion for new trial sufficient to have properly and timely raised this issue in the trial court, Jones v. State , 373 So.2d 1221 , 1225 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 373 So.2d 1225 (Ala. 1979), the defendant's conviction is still due to be affirmed on this ground. "(C)riminal liability for receiving or concealing stolen property may attach where one was present but did not participate in the actual taking and carrying away of the property." Thomas v. State , 389 So.2d 552 , 554 (Ala.Cr.App. 1980); White v. State , 3 1981Even if we hold the comments made by defense counsel during the hearing of the motion for new trial sufficient to have properly and timely raised this issue in the trial court, Jones v. State, 373 So.2d 1221, 1225 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 373 So.2d 1225 (Ala.1979), the defendant’s conviction is still due to be affirmed on this ground. “(Criminal liability for receiving or concealing stolen property may attach where one was present but did not participate in the actual taking and carrying away of the property.” Thomas v. State, 389 So.2d 552, 554 (Ala.Cr.App.1980); White v. State, 383 So.2d | 2 | 1981–1981 |
Washington v. State
green
1 sentence2001Recently, 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). | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Stephens v. State
green
1 sentence2001Recently, 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). | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Stephens v. State
green
1 sentence2001Recently, 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). | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Rutledge v. State
green
1 sentence2001Recently, 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). | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Gibson v. State
green
1 sentence2001Recently, 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). | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Washington v. State
neutral
1 sentence2001Recently, 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). | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Chatom v. State
green
1 sentence1994In Chatom v. State , 619 So.2d 222 , 224-25 (Ala.Cr.App. 1993), this court held: " '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.Cr.App. 1986). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.