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 1972–1987 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Fikes v. Alabama
green
2 sentences1977Appellant argues that it does not meet the test required of a magnetic tape recording as set forth in Fikes v. State, 263 Ala. 89, 98 , 81 So.2d 303, 311 , rev’d on other grounds, 352 U.S. 191 , 77 S.Ct. 281 , 1 L.Ed.2d 246 , that, “a magnetic tape recording may be used as evidence when it is of matters otherwise legal, and provided the proper safeguards are shown to have been used so as to protect the recording against error” or spoliation and the speakers as recorded “[are] properly identified and adequate safeguards taken to insure authenticity.” We think the tape meets that test. 1977Appellant argues that it does not meet the test required of a magnetic tape recording as set forth in Fikes v. State, 263 Ala. 89, 98 , 81 So.2d 303, 311 , rev’d on other grounds, 352 U.S. 191 , 77 S.Ct. 281 , 1 L.Ed.2d 246 , that, “a magnetic tape recording may be used as evidence when it is of matters otherwise legal, and provided the proper safeguards are shown to have been used so as to protect the recording against error” or spoliation and the speakers as recorded “[are] properly identified and adequate safeguards taken to insure authenticity.” We think the tape meets that test. | 5 | 1972–1987 |
Fikes v. State
red
2 sentences1977Appellant argues that it does not meet the test required of a magnetic tape recording as set forth in Fikes v. State, 263 Ala. 89, 98 , 81 So.2d 303, 311 , rev’d on other grounds, 352 U.S. 191 , 77 S.Ct. 281 , 1 L.Ed.2d 246 , that, “a magnetic tape recording may be used as evidence when it is of matters otherwise legal, and provided the proper safeguards are shown to have been used so as to protect the recording against error” or spoliation and the speakers as recorded “[are] properly identified and adequate safeguards taken to insure authenticity.” We think the tape meets that test. 1977Appellant argues that it does not meet the test required of a magnetic tape recording as set forth in Fikes v. State, 263 Ala. 89, 98 , 81 So.2d 303, 311 , rev’d on other grounds, 352 U.S. 191 , 77 S.Ct. 281 , 1 L.Ed.2d 246 , that, “a magnetic tape recording may be used as evidence when it is of matters otherwise legal, and provided the proper safeguards are shown to have been used so as to protect the recording against error” or spoliation and the speakers as recorded “[are] properly identified and adequate safeguards taken to insure authenticity.” We think the tape meets that test. | 5 | 1972–1987 |
Bufford v. State
neutral
1 sentence1987Bufford v. State , 382 So.2d 1162 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied , 382 So.2d 1175 (Ala. 1980), and appeal after remand, 399 So.2d 894 (Ala.Cr.App. 1981). "[A] magnetic tape recording may be used as evidence when it is of matters otherwise legal, and provided proper safeguards are shown to have been used so as to protect the recording against error or spoliation" and the speakers recorded are properly identified and adequate safeguards are taken to insure authenticity. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Ex Parte State Ex Rel. Attorney General
green
1 sentence1987Bufford v. State , 382 So.2d 1162 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied , 382 So.2d 1175 (Ala. 1980), and appeal after remand, 399 So.2d 894 (Ala.Cr.App. 1981). "[A] magnetic tape recording may be used as evidence when it is of matters otherwise legal, and provided proper safeguards are shown to have been used so as to protect the recording against error or spoliation" and the speakers recorded are properly identified and adequate safeguards are taken to insure authenticity. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Bufford v. State
green
1 sentence1987Bufford v. State , 382 So.2d 1162 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied , 382 So.2d 1175 (Ala. 1980), and appeal after remand, 399 So.2d 894 (Ala.Cr.App. 1981). "[A] magnetic tape recording may be used as evidence when it is of matters otherwise legal, and provided proper safeguards are shown to have been used so as to protect the recording against error or spoliation" and the speakers recorded are properly identified and adequate safeguards are taken to insure authenticity. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Voudrie v. State
green
1 sentence1982Voudrie , supra. A magnetic tape recording may be used as evidence when it is of matter otherwise legal, and provided that proper safeguards are shown to have been used so as to protect the recording against error or spoilation and the speakers recorded are properly identified and adequate safeguards are taken to insure authenticity. | 1 | 1982–1982 |