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.
18 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 1995–2025 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Mississippi 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 |
|---|---|---|
Hunter v. Stategreen2 sentences2025Hunter v. State, 684 So. 2d 625, 635 (Miss. 1996) (stating that “[i]t is rudimentary that the jury must be instructed regarding the elements of the crime with which the defendant is charged . . . even though the defendant did not present an acceptable instruction, the State was obligated to do so”). 2025Id. (¶ 64) (noting that the State met its burden by providing proper jury elements instructions); Hunter, 684 So. 2d at 636 (“Therefore, even though the defendant did not present an acceptable instruction, the State was obligated to do so.”) At the outset, today’s case is instantly distinguishable from Thomas in that, here, the State never met its duty. | 7 | 12 |
Richard White v. State of Mississippigreen2 sentences2017Appellate courts “must review jury instructions as a whole to ascertain whether the jury was fully and fairly instructed regarding the applicable law.” White v. State, 195 So. 3d 765, 768 (¶7) (Miss. 2016) (citation omitted). 2017Appellate courts “must review jury instructions as a whole to ascertain whether the jury was fully and fairly instructed regarding the applicable law.” White v. State, 195 So. 3d 765, 768 (¶7) (Miss. 2016) (citation omitted). | 2 | 2 |
Watson v. Stategreen1 sentence2025Reversal on this issue is warranted.” Hunter, 684 So. 2d at 636 (citing Henderson v. State, 660 So. 2d 220, 222 (Miss. 1995); Neal v. State, 451 So. 2d 743 , 757 n.9 (Miss. 1984); Watson v. State, 465 So. 2d 1025, 1031 (Miss. 1985)). ¶60. | 1 | 1 |
James Robert Rowsey v. State of Mississippigreen1 sentence2025Id. at 636 (“Therefore, even though the defendant did not present an acceptable instruction, the State was obligated to do so.”). ¶57. | 1 | 1 |
Henderson v. Stategreen1 sentence2025Reversal on this issue is warranted.” Hunter, 684 So. 2d at 636 (citing Henderson v. State, 660 So. 2d 220, 222 (Miss. 1995); Neal v. State, 451 So. 2d 743 , 757 n.9 (Miss. 1984); Watson v. State, 465 So. 2d 1025, 1031 (Miss. 1985)). ¶60. | 1 | 1 |
Kolberg v. Stategreen2 sentences2015See Kolberg v. State, 829 So.2d 29, 46 (Miss.2002), overruled on other grounds by Shaffer v. State, 740 So.2d 273, 282 (Miss.1998); Hunter v. State, 684 So.2d 625, 636 (Miss.1996) (stating that "[i]t is rudimentary that the jury must be instructed regarding the elements of the crime with which the defendant is charged ... even though the defendant did not present an acceptable instruction, the State was obligated to do so”). 2015See Kolberg v. State, 829 So. 2d 29, 46 (Miss.2002), overruled on other grounds by Shaffer v. State, 740 So. 2d 273, 282 (Miss. 1998); Hunter v. State, 684 So. 2d 625, 636 (Miss. 1996) (stating that “[i]t is rudimentary that the jury must be instructed regarding the elements of the crime with which the defendant is charged . . . even though the defendant did not present an acceptable instruction, the State was obligated to do so”). 18 | 1 | 1 |
Shaffer v. Stategreen2 sentences2015See Kolberg v. State, 829 So.2d 29, 46 (Miss.2002), overruled on other grounds by Shaffer v. State, 740 So.2d 273, 282 (Miss.1998); Hunter v. State, 684 So.2d 625, 636 (Miss.1996) (stating that "[i]t is rudimentary that the jury must be instructed regarding the elements of the crime with which the defendant is charged ... even though the defendant did not present an acceptable instruction, the State was obligated to do so”). 2015See Kolberg v. State, 829 So. 2d 29, 46 (Miss.2002), overruled on other grounds by Shaffer v. State, 740 So. 2d 273, 282 (Miss. 1998); Hunter v. State, 684 So. 2d 625, 636 (Miss. 1996) (stating that “[i]t is rudimentary that the jury must be instructed regarding the elements of the crime with which the defendant is charged . . . even though the defendant did not present an acceptable instruction, the State was obligated to do so”). 18 | 1 | 1 |
Smith v. Stategreen1 sentence2013“It is well established that voluntary intoxication is not a defense in Mississippi.” Adams v. State, 62 So.3d 432, 441 (¶ 31) (Miss.Ct.App.2011) (citing Smith v. State, 445 So.2d 227, 230-31 (Miss.1984)). ¶ 19. | 1 | 1 |
Adams v. Stategreen1 sentence2013“It is well established that voluntary intoxication is not a defense in Mississippi.” Adams v. State, 62 So.3d 432, 441 (¶ 31) (Miss.Ct.App.2011) (citing Smith v. State, 445 So.2d 227, 230-31 (Miss.1984)). ¶ 19. | 1 | 1 |
Conner v. Statered1 sentence1995We find that although Instruction D-4 was an acceptable instruction, Conner v. State, 632 So.2d 1239, 1257 (Miss.1993), we again state that we will not reverse for denial of an individual instruction when the jury has been instructed properly and fully by the granting of all the instructions. | 1 | 1 |
Catchings v. Stategreen1 sentence1995Catchings, 684 So.2d at 599. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Harrell v. State
green
2 sentences2025Id. (¶ 64) (noting that the State met its burden by providing proper jury elements instructions); Hunter, 684 So. 2d at 636 (“Therefore, even though the defendant did not present an acceptable instruction, the State was obligated to do so.”) At the outset, today’s case is instantly distinguishable from Thomas in that, here, the State never met its duty. 2018The Court also has held "that the State is responsible for making sure the jury is instructed on the essential elements of the crime." Harrell , 134 So.3d at 270 (quoting Hunter v. State , 684 So.2d 625 , 635 (Miss. 1996) ("[I]t is rudimentary that the jury must be instructed regarding the elements of the crime with which the defendant is charged ... [;] even though the defendant did not present an acceptable instruction, the State was obligated to do so.") ). | 3 | 2018–2025 |
Ross v. Hodges
green
2 sentences2005For instance, in Ross v. Hodges, 234 So.2d 905 (Miss.1970), a patient charged her physician with failure to disclose the risk of neurological deficit associated with cranial surgery. 2002For instance, in Ross v. Hodges, 234 So. 2d 905 (Miss. 1970), a patient charged her physician with failure to disclose the risk of neurological deficit associated with cranial surgery. | 2 | 2002–2005 |
David Thomas v. State of Mississippi
green
1 sentence2025On the other hand, today’s case is easily distinguishable from Thomas v. State, 249 So. 3d 331 (Miss. 2018). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Neal v. State
green
1 sentence2025Reversal on this issue is warranted.” Hunter, 684 So. 2d at 636 (citing Henderson v. State, 660 So. 2d 220, 222 (Miss. 1995); Neal v. State, 451 So. 2d 743 , 757 n.9 (Miss. 1984); Watson v. State, 465 So. 2d 1025, 1031 (Miss. 1985)). ¶60. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.