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.
5 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1995–2025 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Dawson v. Stategreen2 sentences2025As for Walker's argument that he was entitled to introduce into evidence the entirety of his postarrest recorded statement because the State had presented evidence of his prearrest spontaneous statements, that argument is meritless because, "[b]y its very terms, the doctrine of completeness relates only to matters contained in a single conversation." Dawson v. State, 675 So. 2d 897, 905 (Ala. Crim. App. 1995) (opinion on 4Effective July 15, 2024, four months after Walker's trial, Rule 106 was amended to read: "If a party introduces part of any statement, an adverse party may require the introd 2025Evid., provided that, "[w]hen a party introduces part of either a writing or recorded statement, an adverse party may require the introduction at that time of any other part of the writing or statement that ought in fairness to be considered contemporaneously with it."8 "By its very terms, the doctrine of completeness relates only to matters contained in a single conversation." Dawson v. State, 675 So. 2d 897, 905 (Ala. Crim. | 4 | 4 |
Leonard v. Stategreen1 sentence1995See Leonard v. State, 551 So.2d 1143 (Ala.Cr.App.1989). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ex Parte Dawson
green
2 sentences2025The adverse party may do so over a hearsay objection." 11 CR-2024-0426 application for rehearing), aff'd, 675 So. 2d 905 (Ala. 1996). 2001The committee comments to Rule 106 state: "Rule 106 constitutes a rejection of that portion of the corresponding federal rule that expands the historic doctrine of completeness to include the admission of any additional writing or recorded statement that ought in fairness to be considered contemporaneously with an already admitted writing or recorded statement." In Ex parte Drinkard, supra, the Alabama Supreme Court recognized that "`[b]y its very terms, the doctrine of completeness relates only to matters contained in a single conversation.'" 777 *40 So.2d at 302, quoting Dawson v. State, 675 | 2 | 2001–2025 |
Ex Parte Drinkard
green
1 sentence2001The committee comments to Rule 106 state: "Rule 106 constitutes a rejection of that portion of the corresponding federal rule that expands the historic doctrine of completeness to include the admission of any additional writing or recorded statement that ought in fairness to be considered contemporaneously with an already admitted writing or recorded statement." In Ex parte Drinkard, supra, the Alabama Supreme Court recognized that "`[b]y its very terms, the doctrine of completeness relates only to matters contained in a single conversation.'" 777 *40 So.2d at 302, quoting Dawson v. State, 675 | 1 | 2001–2001 |