14 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 1983–2017 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Flowers v. Stategreen2 sentences2011Flowers v. State, 773 So.2d 309, 331-32 (¶ 72) (Miss.2000). ¶ 26. 2005Flowers v. State, 773 So.2d 309, 322 (¶ 72) (Miss.2000). ¶ 9. | 2 | 2 |
Bartolo v. Stategreen1 sentence2016This Court has held that “[b]usiness records, such as telephone billing information, are typically admitted under what is known as the business-records exception[.]” Bartolo v. State, 32 So.3d 522, 531 (¶ 34) (Miss.Ct.App.2009). | 1 | 1 |
Robert Todd v. James Schomig, Warden, Pontiac Correctional Centergreen1 sentence2006E.g., Todd v. Schomig, 283 F.3d 842, 853-54 (7th Cir.2002) ("Todd's employment records . . . with marginally additional foundation could have qualified under the business records exception to the hearsay rule. | 1 | 1 |
Harkins v. Stategreen1 sentence2000The court in Harkins v. State, 735 So.2d 317, 319-320 (Miss.1999) concluded that the actions of a calibration officer in performing his customary role of certifying the calibration of intoxilyzers properly fall under the business records exception to the hearsay rule in Rule 803(6), unless "the source of information or the method or circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness." ¶ 16. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Jones v. Hatchett
green
2 sentences2006Cassibry v. Schlautman , 816 So.2d 398 , 403 (¶ 18) (Miss.Ct.App. 2001) (citing Jones v. Hatchett , 504 So.2d 198 , 202-03 (Miss. 1987)). 2001The court emphasized that the letter "was obviously prepared in anticipation of litigation rather than in the course of regularly conducted business activity, and thus it is not admissible under the business records exception." Id. at 202 . | 2 | 2001–2006 |
In Re TD
green
2 sentences2004In In re T.D., 115 Ill.App.3d 872 , 71 Ill.Dec. 20 , 450 N.E.2d 455 (1983), the court found the container did not fit the business records exception to the hearsay rule because no one identified the label, nor was there testimony it was produced in the routine course of business. 2004In In re T.D., 115 Ill.App.3d 872 , 71 Ill.Dec. 20 , 450 N.E.2d 455 (1983), the court found the container did not fit the business records exception to the hearsay rule because no one identified the label, nor was there testimony it was produced in the routine course of business. | 2 | 2002–2004 |
People v. T.D.
green
2 sentences2004In In re T.D., 115 Ill.App.3d 872 , 71 Ill.Dec. 20 , 450 N.E.2d 455 (1983), the court found the container did not fit the business records exception to the hearsay rule because no one identified the label, nor was there testimony it was produced in the routine course of business. 2002In In re T.D., 115 Ill.App.3d 872 , 71 Ill.Dec. 20 , 450 N.E.2d 455 (1983), the court found the container did not fit the business records exception to the hearsay rule because no one identified the label, nor was there testimony it was produced in the routine course of business. | 2 | 2002–2004 |
Brown v. State
green
2 sentences1999In Brown v. State, 268 Ga. 76 , 485 S.E.2d 486 (1997), the Supreme Court of Georgia analyzed both the hearsay and confrontation clause issues raised by the defendant with regard to the admission of calibration certificates, and this case is thus particularly relevant to the case at bar. 1999In Brown v. State, 268 Ga. 76 , 485 S.E.2d 486 (1997), the Supreme Court of Georgia analyzed both the hearsay and confrontation clause issues raised by the defendant with regard to the admission of calibration certificates, and this case is thus particularly relevant to the case at bar. | 2 | 1997–1999 |
Ulysses Conley v. Mary Francis Wright
green
1 sentence2017"A trial judge cannot be put in error on a matter not presented to him." Conley v. Wright , 193 So.3d 663 , 666 (¶ 12) (Miss. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Cassibry v. Schlautman
green
1 sentence2006Cassibry v. Schlautman , 816 So.2d 398 , 403 (¶ 18) (Miss.Ct.App. 2001) (citing Jones v. Hatchett , 504 So.2d 198 , 202-03 (Miss. 1987)). | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Kettle v. State
green
1 sentence2004Id. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Lauder v. State
green
2 sentences1983We are unpersuaded by the argument that such tags are technically excludable as hearsay unless qualified under the business records exception; State v. Coleman, supra; Lauder v. State, 233 Md. 142 , 195 A.2d 610 (1963); 31A C.J.S., Evidence § 194d; since the inherent unreliability of hearsay is not present in this type of evidence. 1983We are unpersuaded by the argument that such tags are technically excludable as hearsay unless qualified under the business records exception; State v. Coleman, supra; Lauder v. State, 233 Md. 142 , 195 A.2d 610 (1963); 31A C.J.S., Evidence § 194d; since the inherent unreliability of hearsay is not present in this type of evidence. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
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.